If you would like to submit a question or make a comment, please email Dr. Taylor at thebrain@arlenetaylor.org.
Equality can be defined as the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, and opportunities. In mathematics, equality is a symbolic expression of two quantities being equal. If you look up synonyms, you will find words such as:
Look at almost any type of defined inequality and there will be a spoken or unspoken bias (or opinion) that some individuals are worth more than others, are more deserving than others, or should be rewarded more highly than others—based on skin color or gender, for two. This will be acted out as unequal pay and/or recognition for the same job. Also, redlining or other subtle or not-so-subtle criteria for joining churches or clubs or other organizations.
Every brain is valuable simply because it exists. Some brains are “smarter” than other brains. But one would be hard pushed to prove that human beings—given the same educational opportunities and upbringing—are universally “dumber” or “smarter” based on race, skin color, or ethnicity.
Every brain on the planet has some biases. Bias can be defined as an inclination for or against something. Initially and largely innately in the brain, it appears related to safety. Bias assessments may be the fastest decisions the brain ever makes, occurring at nano-second speeds and related to a perception of safety. Generally, the brain seems to feel safer around what is familiar and what is most like it.
However, unmanaged or inappropriately managed bias can quickly turn into prejudice, racism, and bigotry, to name just a few—all of which can become deeply ingrained in the brain. They can impact all interactions, running in the background much like apps run in the background on a mobile phone. The negative aspects of racism, bigotry, and prejudice may have some basis in cellular memory, but typically a newborn doesn’t care who takes care of it in terms of gender, race, or skin color: it just wants to be cared for.
When I lived in North Carolina, I became acquainted with several individuals who were raised by a nanny whose skin color was different from theirs. In some instances they bonded with this individual as tightly (if not more so) than as they did with own biological family members.
Unless small children have learned to dislike other children based on gender or race or skin color, they tend to play quite well together and don’t seem to particularly register “differences.” However, children observe their parents and other adults and can pick up prejudice, bigotry, and racism quite quickly—along with bullying behaviors and violence. There may also be some impact from biological ancestors transmitted through cellular memory, i.e., epigenetics. This can include prejudice related not just to race, gender, or skin color, but also to politics, education, religion, and you-name-it.
Fortunately, as human beings have the opportunity to become acquainted with others who are different from them, they can “learn” to avoid blanket prejudice based on externals alone. After all, the brain is the same color and blood looks red regardless of gender or skin color.
This is how my brain understands bias, prejudice, and discrimination.
Think of bias as an innate preference. It appears that the human brain has an innate safety bias toward what is known and familiar. In fact, the fastest determination the brain ever makes when confronted with something new is whether or not it is familiar. When I meet a creature for the first time, my brain has already whizzed through a sequence of determinations such as:
You get the idea. Suppose you see a fork on the floor. Your brain will immediately try to identify the object and search for a label. “Ah, a fork.” (Not every brain on this planet has seen a fork so for those who have not, the object will not be known and familiar.) After that, what your brain has learned about the rules for forks will likely kick in (e.g., forks should not be on the floor; it needs to be picked up so it doesn’t cause injury; it must be washed before it can be used in preparing or eating food). All things being equal, the brain feels more comfortable with the familiar. Therefore, it makes sense that you may be biased in favor of your own culture and language because it is known and familiar.
I think of prejudice as a learned, preconceived opinion about someone or something. It can be positive or negative. For example, I am prejudiced against wandering around alone at midnight in the heart of strange city or eating food prepared and offered by road-side vendors in almost any country. I am prejudiced toward certain types of favorite foods, music, books, travel, people who have a good sense of humor, and so on. Prejudices can have positive or negative implications, too. Prejudices are often not only pervasive but also powerfully negative in race, culture, politics, religion, education, gender, and sexual orientation—to name just a few.
I think of discrimination as the process a person’s brain goes through whereby it responds differently to a person or situation or belief system as compared to others. The word itself appears to come from the Latin verb, discrimino: to separate, to distinguish, or to make a distinction. The ability to discriminate quickly and effectively is crucial to living safely. As with prejudice, it can have positive or negative implications. Some discriminate negatively toward people and ideas ad infinitum just because they are different.
Have I have experienced discrimination? Of course, many times. My guess is that at some level or another so has most everyone on this planet. It’s part and parcel of the human condition. For example, recently I offered to speak about brain function at a four-year college. I was told very directly that this would never happen because I am “white.” I am. From a distance and without makeup on, some find it difficult to see where my hair stops and my skin begins. I did not, however, choose my skin color. So, as I said, human beings experience discrimination. It’s a fact of life. The bigger question for me is whether or not I will take discrimination personally and overreact or just move on through other open doors. My personal goal is to avoid discriminating negatively simply on the basis of differences—especially those over which an individual has no choice or control.
The three examples you have given are core characteristics of human beings. When you are talking about an equalitarian society and three fundamental factors are basically discounted, that does not meet my understanding of equalitarian.The brain can create a bias about almost anything. Here are a few examples (in alphabetical order):
And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Having a bias is not necessarily bad or undesirable. It is what you do about that bias, what you say, and how you act. That’s one reason I believe it is very important to identify your own biases. Everything after the brain’s initial bias assessment related to safety tends to represent a learned response—based on personal experience, reports from others you trust, what you read or hear on the news…. If it is a valid and appropriate learned response, great. If not, there may be undesirable consequences.
I believe cellular memory from the past 3-4 generations absolutely impacts a person’s life. Period. If there are positive memories of behaviors of ancestors or negative memories of past abuse and trauma, it appears those are filed within actual brain and body cells. The problem is that no one can change the past. Individuals can choose to heal past woundedness and at least at a personal level, become the person they wish others to be—at the same time working with whatever groups and organizations are taking positive steps toward actual equality. Actions that result in undesirable consequences (e.g., rioting, property destruction, theft, injury, death) rarely have positive long-term effects.
My brain’s opinion: if one’s generational inheritance includes bigotry of any type, racism, or gender inequality, an individual may be predisposed to those thoughts. This does not mean the individual must make those their thoughts, conform to them, and act upon them. Unimpaired, in adulthood people choose the choices they make and the behaviors they exhibit. They can choose to follow “urges” or change their thoughts and take a different path.
The answer to this question likely revolves around what you learned growing up and your belief system in adulthood. Think of whatever you believe as a type of “bias.” The purpose of a shower is to remove dirt (defined as a substance that ordinarily does not belong on your skin) along with dead skin cells. If you start with a towel that has already been used, your brain may say the towel is dirty. If you drop the towel on the floor your brain may think it is now dirty. If you start with an unused towel and it removes dirt and dead skin, your brain may say the towel is now dirty. If your brain believes that dead skin is not dirty because it once belonged to you—and there was no actual dirt to remove—it may say the towel is clean and reusable. What does your brain believe for you?
It has been traditional to use male subjects (whether mouse, rat, monkey, or human) because, as one male researcher put it, the fluctuations of hormones in a female would clutter up the conclusions. I responded by saying that this was precisely the reason females need to be used as research subjects at least equally with males (by later adulthood females tend to outnumber males). My brain’s opinion is that it represents inequality in research. How do medications and treatments impact a female with her fluctuations of hormones, as he put it? Very differently if anecdotal reports are representative.
A neuroscientist at the University of Colorado School of Medicine I Aurora, Colorado, was doing studies with mice. She was surprised, so the story goes, to notice that the brains of some female mice who had Down Syndrome (a defect involving chromosome 21), evidenced some unexpected abnormalities. She already knew that the brains of trisomic male mice (with Down Syndrome) showed changes in their hippocampus related to protein levels. These female mice, however, showed the most serious changes in their cerebellums. Mice and rats have similarities to the human brain. Therefore, findings in these rodents often lead to potential correlations with human brains. Gardener has been quoted as saying, “If we find that males or females are differing not only in their baseline impairment, but in their response to drugs, we need to know that. We could be missing a big piece of information that could lead to better or different clinical trials.” So, if male mice had changes in their hippocampus (the brain’s search engine), and female mice had more significant changes in their cerebellum, this potentially could have implications for humans with Down Syndrome.
Your question triggers a good laugh. Yes, a thorn in the side of many speakers is the individual who uses a question as a platform to exhibit how much the person “thinks” he or she knows about the subject, has an axe to grind, has a very different opinion and wants everyone to know that, hopes to look superior by making the speaker look foolish, or ad infinitum. Early on in my career when I was asked just such a question, it was tempting to try to turn the tables on the unenlightened questioner. I’m glad I took a different path, and I did that partly on the advice of a brain-function researcher from Stanford University. He reminded me that every brain is unique and only has its own opinion—including brains that are unhealthy, unbalanced, extremely prejudiced, and argumentative. According to this researcher, the speaker’s challenge is to avoid taking anything personally, avoid arguing about that brain’s opinion or belief, decide how long the entire audience is to be subjected to the diatribe, and to learn to move on as graciously as possible.
There are only a few things that I believe the brain can learn to control: your thoughts, your visualizations (what you see in your mind’s eye), what you say, and how you treat others. My goal is to present my brain’s opinion of the research without making anyone else feel stupid, bad, less than, etc. That may not always be the outcome because every brain chooses how to respond, but at least I have made my comments without any put-down intent.
A most egregious incident occurred recently while I was making a presentation at a four-year college. An older individual in the audience said: “I’m sure you will be able to give me references of studies that have proven Caucasian brains innately have a much higher average IQ than non-Caucasian brains.” Initially I was a bit flummoxed (or gob smacked, to use a British expression from my childhood), finding it difficult to believe the individual would make such a comment in the presence of hundreds of brains from other races and cultures.
A professor in the audience later told me that I turned my back to the audience momentarily and when I turned around my response was, “I can’t believe someone would even make such a comment in the 21st century. To my knowledge no such studies exist.” Then I continued my presentation.
I’ve thought about that comment several times since, trying to guess that brain’s underlying reason for making such a statement. I’ll never know for sure, but it may have been triggered from that person’s cellular memory, past personal experiences, or perhaps even from serious self-esteem issues. Sometimes incidents like that cause speakers (myself included) to avoid taking questions from the general audience.
Tough choice. However, if one side puts the kids down because they are biracial, seeing that side of the family is still going to be hurtful and energy draining for whichever parent takes the children. You will need to consider how the undertone of prejudice is impacting the children. Are you able to help them see it for what it is and help them learn how to deal with it? If not, maybe you two as parents need to visit each family, explain how their prejudice is harming their grandchildren and give them a choice: clean up their act or visits will be infrequent. A good counselor could no doubt give you some helpful options.
According to Dr. Wayne Dyer, every activity has an energy field. Avoid low-energy fields where there’s excessive alcohol, drug consumption, or violent behavior. Also, avoid gatherings where ethnic or religious exclusions and virtriolic prejudice or judgment are the focus. Immerse yourself in nature and commit to helping others in need with visits to the elderly in geriatric centers, etc. (Dyer, Wayne W,, PhD. The Power of Intention. pp. 76-78. CA: Hay House, Inc., 2004)
Studies have shown that spending time at oceans, beaches, mountains, or parks, and around fields of green or trees can help you gain energy, nature being a powerful energy source. (Gordon, Jon, M.A. Become an Energy Addict. pp. 10-11. GA: Longstreet Press, 2003)
One of my favorite quotes says: “You are not obligated to attend every argument to which you are invited….
Where does it come from? If they’re speaking aloud, the words themselves are likely coming from Broca’s area in the Left Frontal Lobe. If they’re using short four-letter-type emotional words, those may be coming from the Right Posterior, the more affective division of the brain. Their intent, however, may be driven from the emotional limbic system (the subconscious second brain layer) or even from the stress-reaction forms loaded in the brain stem.
It does not appear from your question that your daughter is triggering this behavior by her words or actions. Negative behaviors such as those you described typically have more to do with the person who is exhibiting them than with the recipient. Epithets may be the result of poor self-esteem levels, a sense of fear and inadequacy, learned prejudice, misplaced anger, trying to discharge pent-up negative emotional energy, and so on. That does not excuse the behavior, but it may help for her to realize that the behaviors are coming from their brains—not hers.
If you are old enough, you likely know about the placement of individuals of Japanese heritage in “camps” around the time of the 2nd World War—a blot on American history—just because Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.
Help your daughter understand that being rude and saying mean things to others is a learned behavior. These students must come from an environment where they have heard some rather ugly things said, and they are simply living out what they have experienced. Likely she will never know what is going on in their worlds. Whenever possible, suggest your daughter avoid these individuals. Certainly, help her role-play how to refrain from overreacting or replying in kind. When this occurs in my life (as it does in the life of most everyone), I try to minimize my contact with the person. If I know it is highly likely that individual and I will cross paths again, I look for some way to validate the person in the hope this will help them to feel better about him/herself.
For example, if one of the offending students makes a comment in class that is at all insightful or interesting, she might say at the break: “I thought that was an interesting question. You articulate very well, and it gave me a new perspective.” And move on. There’s no need to engage the person in conversation. And if she consistently receives a rude response, try to minimize contact with them.
When your daughter does have the choice, encourage her to surround herself with friends and family who say kind, helpful, and affirming things to each other. Gradually I let people out of my life who continually say unkind things, constantly complain and whine, or find fault and are outright rude. When these types of people are in her extended family, she may come into contact with them periodically at family functions, but help her to minimize contact even then. Remember, just because she is related to a person does not make rude behaviors okay. She can forgive their ugliness without making what they do all right and without choosing to place herself in harm’s way.
The bottom line is that none of us is perfect and everyone makes mistakes. Genuine friends, however, make it clear in their words and actions that you matter to them—and those individuals generally matter to you, too. What goes out usually comes back in some form. That’s a law of the universe. I’m glad that she is choosing to send out the type of energy that she wants to come back to her.
Last, but not least, there are many good educational opportunities available in this country. If you perceive your daughter is being bullied and harassed in this school, I encourage you to evaluate other learning environments that might be a healthier option for her. Life is short at best and spending years in a punishing and dysfunctional environment is not my idea of a good choice.
I wish I had a brilliant answer for you. From what I know of history, change rarely starts from the top. Like so many changes in the past, a calm deliberate, grass-roots movement has seemed to be the most effective and long-lasting. (Finally allowing women to vote, for example.) What I can do—as an immigrant from generations of abject poverty to “The land of the free”—is to make sure that in any relationships I have or in any dealings where I have a voice, to push for genuine equality. For example, I try never to purchase from companies or organizations that I understand allow inequality In a country like America, voting for candidates who truly believe in and will pass legislation related to equality is likely the only way things will change on a national level.
Make no mistake, this is stressful for everyone: for those who have a history of disenfranchisement and for those who had nothing to do with that nor did their ancestors. This cannot be a one-size fits all because one size never fits all. Plus, in my brain’s opinion, simply handing out money may assuage someone’s conscience, but it does nothing to guarantee that the next generation will grow up and mature in an environment of equality.
Every brain appears to have an innate “bias” that helps it discriminate between safe and unsafe situations. This can also include individuals. The safety evaluation is triggered whenever the brain sees and makes a fast nano-second evaluation about any human being:
Depending on its bias assessment, the brain prompts you to approach or withdraw—to “move forward toward” or to “move away from”—the person.
The potential problem occurs when an individual has been taught that a person of a different race or skin color or gender or sexual orientation (or you-name-it) is “unsafe.” This can result in the brain making an inaccurate assessment and then acting on it immediately.
Healthy discrimination based on accurate bias assessments can help keep you safe. Unmanaged, it can be deadly and lead to injury, mob-mentality riots, and death.
Actually, I don’t think everyone does this. Many have told me that initially they recognize their own bias but are able to course-correct quite quickly because everything starts in the brain and actions follow thoughts. According to Newberg and Waldman, it is easier for the brain to first quantify objects into pairs and then differentiate them into opposing groups: right or wrong, light or dark, Republican or Democrat, etc. This neural process of simplification and generalization is a form of biological stereotyping because it does not take into account individual differences and nuances. Once an oppositional dyad is created, the brain will then impose an emotional bias on each, e.g., root for favorite sports team and disparage the other. This includes people from different cultural, religious, and ethnic backgrounds. Unfortunately, this inborn “Us-versus-Them” mentality easily converts into racism. (Newberg, Andrew, MD, and Mark Robert Waldman. Why We Believe What We Believe. P 87-92. NY: Free Press, 2006)
According to some researchers, skin color alone may not reflect a person’s heritage. One even opined that most people have some genealogical history that may not reflect skin color: many people with pale skin have some DNA from darker skinned individuals, and many darker skinned individuals have DNA from traditionally lighter-skinned individuals in their genealogical history. That is one reason I am personally pained by the divisions based on skin color (when all brains are the same color regardless of skin tones, for example) and find it unconscionable. When I had my DNA analyzed several years ago, the report said I was at least mixed English, Irish, French, and First Nation—well, I was born in Canada—and it makes me wish I knew more about my biological ancestors. I know I did very well in archery class in college. (Smile) To look at my skin you would have no idea, however.
My understanding is that “systemic racism” refers to a country or region that used slaves to help build their economy. That would apply to the United States (e.g., the cotton industry alone to say nothing of household slaves) and to many other countries. Some form of slavery is still practiced in a dozen or more countries, with the Global Slavery Index estimating that over 45.8 million people worldwide are living in a form of modern-day slavery.
Sad to say, the practice of slavery has been ubiquitous on Planet Earth for thousands of years. Nothing any country can be proud of. The 20:80 Rule I often speak about in lectures may have been first written about by a freed Greek slave who lived in the 2nd Century AD.
I am familiar with the CNN article you may be referring to—posted October 20, 1995 and titled “Researchers uncover Africans’ part in slavery.” According to Irene Odotei of the University of Ghana, trading guns for people was a big part of the underlying motivation.
As of June 9, of this year [2020], Merriam-Webster dictionary reportedly is changing its definition of racism due to efforts by Kennedy Mitchum, a woman in Missouri.
Having been born in Canada, I learned in school that slavery had been practiced by First Nations people since ancient times. Reportedly, Britain was the first country in the world to abolish the international slave trade in 1807—yes, that was before my time—reportedly the first country in the world to do so. Slavery in Canada is said to have ended through case law in the early 19th century through judicial actions litigated on behalf of slaves seeking manumission (owners freeing their slaves). I have not yet located resources that say if slavery involved more than First Nations, although word-of-mouth says there may have been slaves on the Eastern seaboard of Canada kept by non-First Nations people.
Knowledge is power. My brain’s opinion is that each person needs to get up to speed with the history of slavery, systemic slavery in particular. While it is likely unhelpful to hold all individuals of one race—considering we are all quite mixed—responsible for what happened generations ago, it is helpful to use your vote to place individuals in power who are committed to abolishing the remnants of systemic slavery.
Following are just a few resources you might find enlightening:
http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/9510/ghana_slavery/
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-during-the-slave-trade-many-slaves-were-actually-sold-into-slavery-by-other-more-powerful-black-people
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Canada
https://www.kansascity.com/news/nation-world/national/article243409726.html
https://www.bing.com/search?q=epictetus&cvid=d8b968598c674ff48dba6971ce70856d&FORM=ANSPA1&PC=LCTS
https://www.theclever.com/15-countries-where-slavery-is-still-legal/
