Skip to main content
Social Sci LibreTexts

3.4 Discrimination: Individual and Structural

  • Page ID
    107048
  • \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

    Discrimination

    Often racial and ethnic prejudice leads to discrimination against the subordinate racial and ethnic groups in a given society. Discrimination in this context refers to the arbitrary denial of rights, privileges, and opportunities to members of these groups. The use of the word arbitrary emphasizes that these groups are being treated unequally not because of their lack of merit but because of their race and ethnicity.

    Individual Discrimination

    Often, when people think about discrimination, they envision individual discrimination, or discrimination that individuals practice in their daily lives, usually because they are prejudiced but sometimes even if they are not prejudiced. Individual discrimination is common, as Joe Feagin (1991), a former president of the American Sociological Association, found when he interviewed middle-class African Americans about their experiences. Many of the people he interviewed said they had been refused service, or at least received poor service, in stores or restaurants. Others said they had been harassed by the police, and even put in fear of their lives, just for being Black. Feagin concluded that these examples are not just isolated incidents but rather reflect the larger racism that characterizes US society.

    Much individual discrimination occurs in the workplace, as sociologist Denise Segura (Segura, 1992) documented when she interviewed 152 Mexican American women working in white-collar jobs at a public university in California. More than 40 percent of the women said they had encountered workplace discrimination based on their ethnicity and/or gender, and they attributed their treatment to stereotypes held by their employers and coworkers. Along with discrimination, they were the targets of condescending comments like “I didn’t know that there were any educated people in Mexico that have a graduate degree.”

    Institutional Discrimination

    Individual discrimination is important to address, indeed.  However, institutional discrimination, or discrimination that pervades the practices of whole institutions, such as housing, medical care, law enforcement, employment, and education is as or more harmful than individual discrimination and thus deserves our attention. Institutional discrimination does not just affect a few isolated people of color. Instead, it affects large numbers of individuals simply because of their race or ethnicity. Sometimes institutional discrimination is also based on gender, disability, and other characteristics.

    In the area of race and ethnicity, institutional discrimination often stems from prejudice, as was certainly true in the South during segregation. However, just as individuals can discriminate without being prejudiced, so can institutions when they engage in practices that seem to be racially neutral but in fact have a discriminatory effect. Individuals in institutions can also discriminate without realizing it. They make decisions that turn out, upon close inspection, to discriminate against people of color even if they did not mean to do so.  Similarly, institutions can discriminate even if they do not intend to do so.  To illustrate this, we turn briefly to some examples of institutional discrimination that have been the subject of government investigation and scholarly research.

    Mortgages, Redlining, and Residential Segregation

    When loan officers review mortgage applications, they consider many factors, including the person’s income, employment, and credit history. The law forbids them to consider race and ethnicity. Yet African Americans and Latinos are more likely than whites to have their mortgage applications declined (Blank, Venkatachalam, McNeil, & Green, 2005). Because members of these groups tend to be poorer than whites and to have less desirable employment and credit histories, the higher rate of mortgage rejections may be appropriate, albeit unfortunate.

    To control for this possibility, researchers take these factors into account and in effect compare whites, African Americans, and Latinos with similar incomes, employment, and credit histories. Some studies are purely statistical, and some involve white, African American, and Latino individuals who independently visit the same mortgage-lending institutions. Both types of studies find that African Americans and Latinos are still more likely than whites with similar qualifications to have their mortgage applications rejected (Turner, Freiberg, Godfrey, Herbig, Levy, & Smith, 2002). We will probably never know whether loan officers are consciously basing their decisions on racial prejudice, but their practices still amount to racial and ethnic discrimination whether the loan officers are consciously prejudiced or not.

    There is also evidence of banks rejecting mortgage applications for people who wish to live in certain urban, supposedly high-risk neighborhoods, and of insurance companies denying homeowner’s insurance or else charging higher rates for homes in these same neighborhoods. Practices like these that discriminate against houses in certain neighborhoods are called redlining, and they also violate the law (Ezeala-Harrison, Glover, & Shaw-Jackson, 2008). Because the people affected by redlining tend to be people of color, redlining, too, is an example of institutional discrimination.

    Mortgage rejections and redlining contribute to another major problem facing people of color: residential segregation. Housing segregation is illegal but is nonetheless widespread because of mortgage rejections and other processes that make it very difficult for people of color to move out of segregated neighborhoods and into unsegregated areas. African Americans in particular remain highly segregated by residence in many cities, much more so than is true for other people of color. The residential segregation of African Americans is so extensive that it has been termed hypersegregation and more generally called American apartheid (Massey & Denton, 1993).

    In addition to mortgage rejections, a pattern of subtle discrimination by realtors and homeowners makes it difficult for African Americans to find out about homes in white neighborhoods and to buy them (Pager, 2008). For example, realtors may tell African American clients that no homes are available in a particular white neighborhood, but then inform white clients of available homes. This practice is referred to as steering, when real estate agents "steer" BIPOC away from predominantly White neighborhoods to neighborhoods of color. The now routine posting of housing listings on the Internet might be reducing this form of housing discrimination, but not all homes and apartments are posted, and some are simply sold by word of mouth to avoid certain people learning about them.

    The hypersegregation experienced by African Americans cuts them off from the larger society, as many rarely leave their immediate neighborhoods, and results in concentrated poverty, where joblessness, crime, and other problems reign. For several reasons, then, residential segregation is thought to play a major role in the seriousness and persistence of African American poverty (Rothstein, 2012; Stoll, 2008).

    Health Care

    People of color have higher rates of disease and illness than whites. One question that arises is why their health is worse. One possible answer involves institutional discrimination based on race and ethnicity.

    Several studies use hospital records to investigate whether people of color receive optimal medical care, including coronary bypass surgery, angioplasty, and catheterization. After taking the patients’ medical symptoms and needs into account, these studies find that African Americans are much less likely than whites to receive the procedures just listed. This is true when poor Blacks are compared to poor whites and also when middle-class Blacks are compared to middle-class whites (Smedley, Stith, & Nelson, 2003). In a novel way of studying race and cardiac care, one study performed an experiment in which several hundred doctors viewed videos of African American and white patients, all of whom, unknown to the doctors, were actors. In the videos, each “patient” complained of identical chest pain and other symptoms. The doctors were then asked to indicate whether they thought the patient needed cardiac catheterization. The African American patients were less likely than the white patients to be recommended for this procedure (Schulman et al., 1999).

    Why does discrimination like this occur? It is possible, of course, that some doctors are racists and decide that the lives of African Americans just are not worth saving, but it is far more likely that they have unconscious racial biases that somehow affect their medical judgments. Regardless of the reason, the result is the same: African Americans are less likely to receive potentially life-saving cardiac procedures simply because they are Black. Institutional discrimination in health care, then, is literally a matter of life and death.

    It is also significant to note that the Latinx population has the highest uninsured rates of any racial or ethnic group within the United States. In 2017, the Census Bureau reported that 49.0% of Latinx had private insurance coverage, as compared to 75.4% for non-Latinx whites (United States Department of Health and Human Services, 2019). In 2017, 38.2% of all Hispanics had public health insurance coverage, as compared to 33.7% for non-Hispanic whites (ibid). Most Americans have health insurance through their employers, as the country does not ensure that all Americans have insurance. This "business as usual" practice has had a disproportionately negative impact on the Latinx population. As explained in an American Medical Association article, "the structural drivers that have led to health inequity in Latinx communities have been exacerbated by COVID-19 and have contributed to the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on these communities" (Robeznieks, 2020).

    Employment Discrimination

    Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned racial discrimination in employment, including hiring, wages, and firing. However, African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans still have much lower earnings than whites. Several factors explain this disparity. Despite Title VII, however, an additional reason is that people of color continue to face discrimination in hiring and promotion (Hirsh & Cha, 2008). It is again difficult to determine whether such discrimination stems from conscious prejudice or from unconscious prejudice on the part of potential employers, but it is racial discrimination nonetheless.

    A now-classic field experiment documented such discrimination. Sociologist Devah Pager (2003) had young white and African American men apply independently in person for entry-level jobs. They dressed the same and reported similar levels of education and other qualifications. Some applicants also admitted having a criminal record, while other applicants reported no such record. As might be expected, applicants with a criminal record were hired at lower rates than those without a record. However, in striking evidence of racial discrimination in hiring, African American applicants without a criminal record were hired at the same low rate as the white applicants with a criminal record.


    Contributors and Attributions

    Works Cited

    • Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the Street: Decency, Violence, and the Moral Life of the Inner City. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
    • Appier, J. (1998). Policing women: The Sexual Politics of Law Enforcement and the LAPD. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
    • Blitstein, R. (2009). Weathering the storm. Miller-McCune, 2(July–August), 48–57. 
    • Blank, E.C., Venkatachalam, P., McNeil, L., & Green, R.D. (2005). Racial discrimination in mortgage lending in Washington, DC: A mixed methods approach. The Review of Black Political Economy, 33(2), 9–30. 
    • Bonilla-Silva, E. (2009). Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America. 3rd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
    • Chou, R.S. & Feagin, J.R. (2008). The Myth of the Model Minority: Asian Americans Facing Racism. NY: Routledge.
    • Ezeala-Harrison, F., Glover, G.B., & Shaw-Jackson, J. (2008). Housing loan patterns toward minority borrowers in Mississippi: Analysis of some micro data evidence of redlining. The Review of Black Political Economy, 35(1), 43–54. 
    • Feagin, J.R. (1991). The continuing significance of race: AntiBlack discrimination in public places. American Sociological Review, 56, 101–116. 
    • Feagin, J.R. (2006). Systemic Racism: A Theory of Oppression. London, UK: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
    • Geronimus, A.T. , Hicken M.T., Pearson J.A., Seashols S.J., Brown K.L., & Cruz T.D. (2010). Do us Black women experience stress-related accelerated biological aging?: A novel theory and first population-based test of black-white differences in Telomere Length. Human Nature, 21(1):19–38. 
    • Gould, S.J. (1994). Curveball. The New Yorker, pp. 139–149. 
    • Hacker, A (2003 [1992]). Two Nations: Black & White, Separate, Hostile, Unequal. New York, NY: Scribner.
    • Herrnstein, R.J. & Murray, C. (1996).The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York, NY: Free Press.
    • Hirsh, C.E., & Cha, Y. (2008). Understanding employment discrimination: A multilevel approach. Sociology Compass, 2(6), 1989–2007. 
    • Holland, J. (2011). Debunking the big lie right-wingers use to justify Black poverty and unemployment. AlterNet
    • Hurh, W.M., & Kim, K.C. (1999). The “success” image of Asian Americans: Its validity, and its practical and theoretical implications. In C. G. Ellison & W. A. Martin (Eds.), Race and ethnic relations in the United States (pp. 115–122). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.
    • Massey, D.S., & Sampson, R.J. (2009). Moynihan redux: Legacies and lessons. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 621, 6–27. 
    • Massey, D.S. & Denton, N.A. (1993). American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    • Merton, R.K. (1949). Discrimination and the American creed. In R.M. MacIver (Ed.), Discrimination and National Welfare (pp. 99–126). New York, NY: Institute for Religious Studies.
    • Min, P.G. (Ed.). (2005). Asian Americans: Contemporary Trends and Issues (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    • Muhammad, K.G. (2007). White may be might, but it’s not always right. The Washington Post, p. B3. 
    • Murray, C. (1984). Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950–1980. New York, NY: Basic Books.
    • Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937–975.
    • Robeznieks, A. (2020, October 23). Why covid-19 hits Latinx at nearly double overall U.S. rate. American Medical Association. 
    • Robinson, E. (2012, March 23). Perils of walking while Black. The Washington Post, p. A19. 
    • Rothstein, R. (2012). Racial segregation continues, and even intensifies. Economic Policy Institute.
    • Stoll, M.A. (2008). Race, place, and poverty revisited. In A.C. Lin & D.R. Harris (Eds.), The Colors of Poverty: Why Racial and Ethnic Disparities Persist (pp. 201–231). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
    • Schulman, K.A., et al. (1999). The effect of race and sex on physicians’ recommendations for cardiac catheterization. The New England Journal of Medicine, 340, 618–626. 
    • Segura, D.A. (1992). Chicanas in white-collar jobs: “You have to prove yourself more.” In C.G. Ellison & W.A. Martin (Eds.), Race and Ethnic Relations in the United States: Readings for the 21st Century (pp. 79–88). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.
    • Smedley, B.D., Stith, A.Y., & Nelson, A.R. (2003). Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
    • Stoll, M.A. (2008). Race, place, and poverty revisited. In A.C. Lin & D.R. Harris (Eds.), The colors of poverty: Why racial and ethnic disparities persist (pp. 201–231). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
    • Turner, M.A. (2002). All Other Things Being Equal: A Paired Testing Study of Mortgage Lending Institutions. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
    • United States Department of Health and Human Services. (2019, August 22). Profile: Latino/Hispanic Americans.