Essentialist segregation

From Segregation Wiki
Revision as of 17:42, 8 April 2024 by Maintenance script (talk | contribs) (Creating page)
Date and country of first publication[1]

2018
None

Definition
At its current state, this definition has been generated by a Large Language Model (LLM) so far without review by an independent researcher or a member of the curating team of segregation experts that keep the Segregation Wiki online. While we strive for accuracy, we cannot guarantee its reliability, completeness and timeliness. Please use this content with caution and verify information as needed. Also, feel free to improve on the definition as you see fit, including the use of references and other informational resources. We value your input in enhancing the quality and accuracy of the definitions of segregation forms collectively offered in the Segregation Wiki ©.

Essentialist segregation is the belief that certain social groups are inherently different from each other and should be separated based on these perceived differences. This form of segregation is rooted in essentialist thinking, which holds that people's identities are fixed and determined by their genetic, biological, or cultural traits.

Essentialist segregation can manifest in various ways, such as racial segregation, gender segregation, or segregation based on other characteristics like religion or nationality. This belief system can lead to discrimination, prejudice, and inequality, as it reinforces the idea that certain groups are superior to others and justifies the unequal treatment of marginalized individuals or communities.

It is important to challenge essentialist segregation and promote inclusivity and diversity to create a more equitable and inclusive society.

See also

References

Notes

  1. Date and country of first publication as informed by the Scopus database (December 2023).

Further reading

Levanon A.; Grusky D.B. (2018) "Why Is There Still So Much Gender Segregation?", Inequality in the 21st Century: A Reader, 370-379. Taylor and Francis. DOI: [htttp://doi.org/10.4324/9780429499821-65 10.4324/9780429499821-65]