Mentalism or sanism describes discrimination and oppression against a mental trait or condition a person has, or is judged to have. This discrimination may or may not be characterized in terms of mental disorder or cognitive impairment; the discrimination is based on numerous factors such as stereotypes about neurodivergence, for example autism spectrum, learning disorders, ADHD, bipolar and personality disorder diagnoses, specific behavioral phenomena such as stuttering and tics, or intellectual disability. Like other "isms" such as sexism and racism, mentalism involves multiple intersecting forms of oppression, complex social inequalities and imbalances of power, it can result in covert discrimination by small insults and indignities. It is characterized by judgments of another person's perceived mental health status; these judgments are followed by actions such as blatant, overt discrimination which may include refusal of service, or the denial of human rights. Mentalism impacts how individuals are treated by the general public, by mental health professionals, by institutions, including the legal system.
The negative attitudes involved may be internalized. The terms mentalism, from "mental", sanism, from "sane", have become established in some contexts, though concepts such as social stigma, in some cases ableism, may be used in similar but not identical ways. While mentalism and sanism are used interchangeably, sanism is becoming predominant in certain circles, such as academics, those who identify as mad and mad advocates and in a socio-political context where sanism is gaining ground as a movement; the movement of sanism is an act of resistance among those who identify as mad, consumer survivors, mental health advocates. In academia evidence of this movement can be found in the number of recent publications about sanism and social work practice; the term "sanism" was coined by Morton Birnbaum during his work representing Edward Stephens, a mental health patient, in a legal case in the 1960s. Birnbaum was a physician and mental health advocate who helped establish a constitutional right to treatment for psychiatric patients along with safeguards against involuntary commitment.
Since first noticing the term in 1980, New York legal professor Michael L. Perlin subsequently continued its use. In 1975 Judi Chamberlain coined the term mentalism in a book chapter of Women Look at Psychiatry; the term became more known when she used it in 1978 in her book On Our Own: Patient Controlled Alternatives to the Mental Health System, which for some time became the standard text of the psychiatric survivor movement in the US. People began to recognize a pattern in how they were treated, a set of assumptions which most people seemed to hold about mental patients regardless of whether they applied to any particular individual at any particular time – that they were incompetent, unable to do things for themselves in need of supervision and assistance, unpredictable to be violent or irrational etc, it was realized that not only did the general public express mentalist ideas, so did ex-patients, a form of internalized oppression. As of 1998 these terms have been adopted by some consumers/survivors in the UK and the USA, but had not gained general currency.
This left a conceptual gap filled in part by the concept of'stigma', but this has been criticized for focusing less on institutionalized discrimination with multiple causes, but on whether people perceive mental health issues as shameful or worse than they are. Despite its use, a body of literature demonstrated widespread discrimination across many spheres of life, including employment, parental rights, immigration, health care and access to justice. However, the use of new "isms" has been questioned on the grounds that they can be perceived as divisive, out of date, or a form of undue political correctness; the same criticisms, in this view, may not apply so much to broader and more accepted terms like'discrimination' or'social exclusion'. There is the umbrella term ableism, referring to discrimination against those who are disabled. In terms of the brain, there is the movement for the recognition of neurodiversity; the term psychophobia has been used with a similar meaning. According to Coni Kalinowski and Pat Risser, mentalism at one extreme can lead to a categorical dividing of people into an empowered group assumed to be normal, healthy and capable, a powerless group assumed to be sick, crazy and violent.
This divide can justify inconsiderate treatment of the latter group and expectations of poorer standards of living for them, for which they may be expected to express gratitude. Further discrimination may involve labeling some as "high functioning" and some as "low-functioning"; the discrimination can be so fundamental and unquestioned that it can stop people empathizing or genuinely seeing the other point of view with respect. Some mental conditions can impair awareness and understanding in certain ways at certain times, but mentalist assumptions may lead others to erroneously believe that they understand the person's situation and needs better than they do themselves. Within the disability rights movement internationally, "there is a lot of sanism", "disability organisations don't always'get' mental health and don't want to be seen as mentally defective." Conversely, those
Persecution of Bahá'ís
Persecution of Bahá'ís occurs in various countries in Iran, where the Bahá'í Faith originated, the location of one of the largest Bahá'í populations in the world. The origins of persecution stem from a variety of Bahá'í teachings inconsistent with traditional Islamic belief, including the finality of Muhammad's prophethood, the placement of Bahá'ís outside the Islamic faith. Thus, Bahá'ís are seen as apostates from Islam, according to some Islamists, must choose between repentance and death. Bahá'í spokespeople, as well as the United Nations, Amnesty International, the European Union, the United States, peer-reviewed academic literature have stated that the members of the Bahá'í community in Iran have been subjected to unwarranted arrests, false imprisonment, torture, unjustified executions and destruction of property owned by individuals and the Bahá'í community, denial of employment, denial of government benefits, denial of civil rights and liberties, denial of access to higher education.
The Bahá'í Faith was established in 1863 by Bahá'u'lláh in Iran. Eighty-nine percent of Iranians adhere to the Twelver branch of Shi'a Islam, which holds as a core doctrine the expected advent of a messianic figure known as the Qa'im or as the Imam Mahdi; the Báb claimed he was the Imam Mahdi and thus he had equal status to Muhammad with the power, which he exercised, to abrogate the final provisions of Islamic law. Bahá'u'lláh, a Bábí who claimed to be the one foretold by the Báb, claimed a similar station for himself in 1863 as a Manifestation of God and as the promised figure foretold in the sacred scriptures of the major religious traditions of the past and founded what came to be known as the Bahá'í Faith. Concerning the historical context of the persecutions, Friedrich W. Affolter in "War Crimes, Genocide, & Crimes against Humanity" writes: Bahá'u'lláh's writings deal with a variety of themes that challenge long-cherished doctrines of Shí'i Islam. In addition to making the'heretic' claim of being a'Manifestation of God,' he suggested that school curricula should include'Western Sciences,' that the nation states should establish a world federal government, that men and women were equal.
Bahá'u'lláh wrote that in this time and age, priests were no longer necessary for religious guidance. Humanity, he argued, had reached an age of maturity where it was incumbent upon every individual to search for God and truth independently; these principles did not only call into question the need for a priesthood, but the entire Shí'i ecclesiastical structure and the vast system of endowments and fees that sustained it. No surprise that in the following decades until the overthrow of the Qájár dynasty in 1925, it was the mullas who instigated attacks against the Bahá'ís in cities or villages where the clerical establishment was influential. In addition to this, the Bábí religion, the forerunner of the Bahá'í Faith had a violent history in Iran. Friedrich W. Affolter writes: Initially, the mullas hoped to stop the Bábí movement from spreading by denouncing its followers as apostates and enemies of God; these denouncements torture of early Bábís. When the Bábís organized to defend themselves, the government sent troops into a series of engagements that resulted in heavy losses on both sides.
The Báb himself was imprisoned from 1846 until 1850 and publicly executed. In August 1852, two deranged Bábís attempted to kill the Shah in revenge for the execution of the Báb; this resulted in an extensive pogrom during which more than 20,000 Bábís – among them 400 Shí'i mullas who had embraced the Bábí teachings – lost their lives. Others have stated that the Bábís armed themselves and prepared for a holy war that became defensive when they encountered state troops in several locations and that two to three thousand Bábís were killed. Bahá ` u ` lláh took a more conciliatory position. Instead, he attempted to engage various governments in dialog. To this day, Bahá'ís are a persecuted minority group in Iran and other predominantly Muslim countries, since they are seen as apostates from Islam, supporters of the West and Israel; the Iranian constitution, drafted during the Iranian Constitutional Revolution in 1906 set the groundwork for the institutionalized persecution of Bahá'ís. While the constitution was modelled on Belgium's 1831 constitution, the provisions guaranteeing freedom of worship were omitted.
Subsequent legislation provided some recognition to Zoroastrians and Christians as equal citizens under state law, but it did not guarantee freedom of religion and "gave unprecedented institutional powers to the clerical establishment."The Islamic Republic of Iran, established after the Iranian revolution, recognizes four religions, whose status is formally protected: Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Islam. Members of the first three minority religions receive special treatment under Iranian law. For example, their members are allowed to drink alcohol, representatives of several minority communities are guaranteed seats in parliament. However, religious freedom in Iran is far from absolute. Conversion away from Islam is forbidden, with both missionaries risking prison; those seeking to start a new religious group face severe restrictions. The Bahá' í Faith faces an technical hurdle. Iranian law recognizes all those who accept the existence of God and the prophethood of Muhammad as Muslims. Bahá'ís accept both of thes
Anti-intellectualism is hostility to and mistrust of intellect and intellectualism expressed as deprecation of education and philosophy, the dismissal of art and science as impractical and contemptible human pursuits. Anti-intellectuals present themselves and are perceived as champions of common folk—populists against political and academic elitism—and tend to see educated people as a status class detached from the concerns of most people, feel that intellectuals dominate political discourse and control higher education. Totalitarian governments apply anti-intellectualism to repress political dissent. During the Spanish Civil War and the following fascist dictatorship of General Francisco Franco, the reactionary repression of the White Terror was notably anti-intellectual, with most of the 200,000 civilians killed being the Spanish intelligentsia, the politically active teachers and academics and writers of the deposed Second Spanish Republic. In the communist state of Democratic Kampuchea, the Khmer Rouge régime of Pol Pot condemned all of the non-communist intelligentsia to death in the Killing Fields.
In the 20th century, societies have systematically removed intellectuals from power, to expediently end public political dissent. During the Cold War, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic ostracized the philosopher Václav Havel as a politically-unreliable man unworthy of ordinary Czechs' trust. Ideologically-extreme dictatorships who mean to recreate a society such as the Khmer Rouge rule of Cambodia pre-emptively killed potential political opponents the educated middle-class and the intelligentsia. To realize the Year Zero of Cambodian history, Khmer Rouge social engineering restructured the economy by de-industrialization and assassinated non-communist Cambodians suspected of "involvement in free-market activities" such as the urban professionals of society and people with political connections to foreign governments; the doctrine of Pol Pot identified the farmers as the true proletariat of Cambodia and the true representatives of the working class entitled to hold government power, hence the anti-intellectual purges.
In 1966, the anti-communist Argentine military dictatorship of General Juan Carlos Onganía intervened at the University of Buenos Aires with the Night of the Long Batons to physically dislodge politically-dangerous academics from five university faculties. That expulsion to exile of the academic intelligentsia became a national brain drain upon the society and economy of Argentina. In support of the military repression of free speech, biochemist César Milstein said: "Our country would be put in order, as soon as all the intellectuals who were meddling in the region were expelled". However, anti-intellectualism is not always violent. Any social group can act anti-intellectually by discounting the humanist value to their society of intellect and higher education. In The Campus Wars, the philosopher John Searle said, he two most salient traits of the radical movement are its anti-intellectualism and its hostility to the university as an institution.... Intellectuals, by definition, are people who take ideas for their own sake.
Whether or not a theory is true or false is important to them, independently of any practical applications it may have. Have, as Richard Hofstadter has pointed out, an attitude to ideas, at once playful and pious. But, in the radical movement, the intellectual ideal of knowledge for its own sake is rejected. Knowledge is seen as valuable only as a basis for action, it is not very valuable there. Far more important than what one knows is. In Social Sciences as Sorcery, the sociologist Stanislav Andreski advised laymen to distrust the intellectuals' appeals to authority when they make questionable claims about resolving the problems of their society: "Do not be impressed by the imprint of a famous publishing house, or the volume of an author's publications.... Remember that the publishers want to keep the printing presses busy, do not object to nonsense if it can be sold."In Science and Relativism: Some Key Controversies in the Philosophy of Science, the epistemologist Larry Laudan said that the prevailing type of philosophy taught at university in the U.
S. is anti-intellectual, because "the displacement of the idea that facts and evidence matter, by the idea that everything boils down to subjective interests and perspectives is—second only to American political campaigns—the most prominent and pernicious manifestation of anti-intellectualism in our time." In the U. S. the American conservative economist Thomas Sowell argued for distinctions between unreasonable and reasonable wariness of intellectuals in their influence upon the institutions of a society. In defining intellectuals as "people whose occupations deal with ideas", they are different from people whose work is the practical application of ideas; that cause for layman mistrust lies in the intellectuals' incompetence outside their fields of expertise. Although possessed of great working knowledge in their specialist fields, when compared to other professions and occupations, the intellectuals of a society face little discouragement against speaking authoritatively beyond their field of formal expertise, thus are unlikely to face responsibility for the social and practical consequences of their errors.
Hence, a physician is judged competent by the effective treatment of the sickness of a patient, yet mi
Social stigma of obesity
The social stigma of obesity or anti-fat bias has resulted in additional difficulties and disadvantages for overweight and obese people. Weight stigma is similar and has been broadly defined as bias or discriminatory behaviors targeted at individuals, because of their weight; such social stigmas can span one's entire life, as long as excess weight is present, starting from a young age and lasting into adulthood. Several studies from across the world indicate overweight and obese individuals experience higher levels of stigma relative to their thinner counterparts. In addition, they marry less experience fewer educational and career opportunities, on average earn a lesser income than normal weight individuals. Although public support regarding disability services, civil rights and anti-workplace discrimination laws for obese individuals have gained support across the years and obese individuals still experience discrimination, which may have implications to physiological and psychological health.
These issues are compounded with the significant negative physiological effects associated with obesity. Anti-fat bias refers to the prejudicial assumption of personality characteristics based on an assessment of a person as being overweight or obese, it is known as "fat shaming". Fat activists allege anti-fat bias can be found in many facets of society, blame the media for the pervasiveness of this phenomenon. Research indicates that self-reported incidents of weight-based discrimination, has increased in the last few decades. Individuals who are subjected to weight-related stigma, appear to be rated more negatively when compared with other groups, such as sexual minorities, those with mental illness. Anti-fat bias has been observed in groups hoping to become physical education instructors. In one study, a group of 344 psychology or physical education majors at a New Zealand University were compared, it was found that the prospective physical education teachers were more to display implicit anti-fat attitudes than the psychology majors.
A number of studies have found that health care providers have explicit and/or implicit biases against overweight people, it has been found that overweight patients may receive lower quality care as a result of their weight. Medical professionals who specialize in the treatment of obesity have been found to have strong negative associations toward obese individuals. In one study, preschool-aged children reported a preference for average-sized children over overweight children as friends; as a consequence of anti-fat bias, overweight individuals find themselves suffering repercussions in many facets of society, including legal and employment issues in their life. Overweight individuals find themselves facing issues caused by increased weight such as decreased lifespan, joint problems, shortness of breath. According to a 2010 review of published studies, interventions seeking to reduce prejudice and social stigma against fat and obesity are ineffective. Weight-related stigma can be characterised by the following aspects: An individual does not have to be overweight or obese, to experience weight-related stigma.
Studies have indicated. This suggests. Many groups who are subjected to stigmatisation, tend to be minorities. Overweight and obese individuals make up the majority of the population in the United States, in other parts of the world. Individuals who are overweight or obese, tend to devalue their own in-group, prefer the out-group. In order to understand weight-biased attitudes, theories have been proposed to explain the discrimination. Christian S. Crandall discusses the "Justification of Stigmatization". In his Social Ideology Perspective draws on traditional North American values of self-determination and self-discipline. Based on these values, anti-fat attitudes may derive from directing blame towards individuals who are overweight; the attribution theory suggests that attitudes towards obese individuals are dependent on how much control they are perceived to have over their weight. Throughout the literature, numerous studies have shown support for this theory. One study conducted a multinational examination of weight bias across four countries with comparable obesity rates.
The study found that attributions of behavioral causes of obesity were associated with greater weight bias. Further, these individuals were more to view obesity as being due to lack of willpower. There appears to be decreased weight bias when weight was attributed to factors that were less within the individual’s control, or when individuals are perceived as trying to lose weight. Anti-fat bias leads people to associate individuals who are overweight or obese with negative personality traits such as "lazy", "gluttonous", "stupid", "smelly", "slow", or "unmotivated"; this bias is not restricted to clinically obese individuals, but encompasses those whose body shape is in some way found unacceptable according to society's modern standards. It is a classical example of the halo effect in cultures where physical preferences favor low body fat. Fat-shaming is common in the United States though most adult Americans are overweight. Huffington Post wrote "two-thirds of American adults are obese, yet overweight and obese individuals are subject to discrimination from employers, healthcare professionals and potential romantic partners".
Anti-fat bias can be moderated by givi