In Argentina, prejudice and bigotry remains strong: almost 35 percent of people say they have felt discrimination against in the past year, according to a new survey.
The poll’s results are negative and show the impact of discrimination across society. Revealingly, given Argentina’s reputation as a nation of immigrants, the highest levels of prejudice among were targeted at Latin American immigrants.
Following in second and third respectively were prejudice against a person’s intellect and discrimination on the basis of sex.
The findings, which come from an annual survey carried out by the University of Buenos Aires’ School of Psychology, offer a new X-ray on the evolution of Argentine society. Conducted by a team of professionals from the OPSA Applied Social Psychology Observatory, the survey looked at prejudice and discrimination among a group of over 1,700 Argentines aged over 18, from all regions of the country.
“Prejudice has to do with an erroneous and inflexible generalisation about a given social group. And, once it is translated into action, it becomes discrimination,” said Joaquín Ungaretti, one of the research project’s coordinators and a doctor in psychology.
“The highest levels of prejudice were aimed at Latin American immigrants, followed by prejudice against people with an intellectual or physical disability,” Ungaretti told Perfil.
The podium is completed by prejudice against women (sexism). At lower levels we find prejudice against the LGBT+ community, the elderly and obese people.
“As in other years, compared with females, males had higher levels of prejudice against nearly all groups, except for prejudice against homosexuals, where we didn’t find significant differences between genders,” said the expert.
“We carried out similar work in 2020 and we wanted to see how it had evolved,” specified Ungaretti.
“When we asked respondents if in the past year they had experienced some kind of discrimination, 35.3 percent answered yes,” he revealed.
Political persuasion
Those who felt discriminated against over the past year stated that the main reason for this situation was their ideology or political persuasion (45.2 percent).
This would indicate that “two decades of extreme political polarisation have harmed relations between Argentine citizens,” remarked Ungaretti, who is also a researcher at the CONICET scientific research institute.
In the face of this evidence, Argentina’s infamous ‘grieta, ‘or political polarisation, has become a central axis of discrimination in Argentina.
The striking note is that some types of discrimination, conditions which already seemed socially overcome, recorded unexpected heights: 18.8 percent claimed they had felt discriminated against because of their age and 14.4 percent over some physical or mental disability; gender comes next on 12 percent.
Then there is some good news: sexuality no longer seems to be such a cause for concern. Only 1.1 percent of those discriminated against said it was due to their sexual orientation – a strikingly low number.
So where are the main places where these negative acts come to light? According to Ungaretti, “by means of the questions, we have determined that the main area where this happens are social networks and the Internet.”
“This is the medium 'par excellence' where they occur and it has become a space that seems to further these polarisations," continued the expert.
Over the last few years, the digital world, with its anonymity and impunity, facilitates hostility and this “emotional outburst,” he added.
Improving the issue
The researcher pointed to ways that society can tackle such issues and reduce prejudice and social discrimination.
“I believe it is important to work on improving institutions and their protagonists – politics, the media, bodies and institutions – which could improve social cohesion,” said Ungaretti.
Improvements are not only cultural matters, they impact on economic and social aspects. “The less prejudice and discrimination, the better a society can develop in every way,” said the expert.
President Javier Milei’s government announced last February that it would be shuttering the INADI anti-discrimination watchdog. The majority of the survey’s respondents, perhaps adhering to the view the body was politically biased, said they agreed with the closure, though almost 61 percent approved of state policies that provide financial resources to victims of discrimination.
Similar contradictions are evident on issues of education and healthcare. While almost seven out of 10 respondents said foreigners should be charged for using the public healthcare system, only 31 percent thought the same policy should be introduced for schooling or higher education.
Comments