People make sloppy guesses about the effects of genes on personality. If you have a gene which is believed to increase impulsiveness, you might have to pay more to borrow money.
Being in the unmarked state means that you don’t have any trait which is considered so important that it gets more attention than anything else about you. (This definition is what I’ve deduced from usage, so it may not be the formal definition.)
Blood types in Japan—if the article is accurate, people with type B blood are stigmatized there because there’s a common belief there that blood type indicates personality.
Being in the unmarked state means that you don’t have any trait which is considered so important that it gets more attention than anything else about you.
So? The lack of a trait is itself a trait. To use your example of blood types, everyone has some blood type, so what would an unmarked trait be?
The unmarked state is about how much weight people give to a trait, not whether you have a trait. Everyone has a blood type. So far as I know, it’s only in Japan that your blood type can affect your chances in life.
So far as I know, whether you have attached or unattached ear lobes doesn’t make a difference anywhere, but a cultural shift could turn it into a big deal.
No, I’m saying that there’s something to be said for privacy about traits which people will hold against you, and something to be said for living among people who won’t punish or exclude you for the traits you’ve got, especially if those traits are impossible or very expensive to change.
Blood types in Japan—if the article is accurate, people with type B blood are stigmatized there because there’s a common belief there that blood type indicates personality.
People make sloppy guesses about the effects of genes on personality. If you have a gene which is believed to increase impulsiveness, you might have to pay more to borrow money.
Does this kind of discrimination already occur based on race, gender, etc.?
Yes, that’s why there’s something to be said for being in the unmarked state when it’s safer.
What do you mean by “unmarked” state?
Remember the law of conservation of expected evidence still applies.
Being in the unmarked state means that you don’t have any trait which is considered so important that it gets more attention than anything else about you. (This definition is what I’ve deduced from usage, so it may not be the formal definition.)
Blood types in Japan—if the article is accurate, people with type B blood are stigmatized there because there’s a common belief there that blood type indicates personality.
So? The lack of a trait is itself a trait. To use your example of blood types, everyone has some blood type, so what would an unmarked trait be?
The unmarked state is about how much weight people give to a trait, not whether you have a trait. Everyone has a blood type. So far as I know, it’s only in Japan that your blood type can affect your chances in life.
So far as I know, whether you have attached or unattached ear lobes doesn’t make a difference anywhere, but a cultural shift could turn it into a big deal.
Let’s apply this definition to you comment here:
You seem to be saying that there’s something to be said for having ear lobes rather than a blood type, this seems wrong.
No, I’m saying that there’s something to be said for privacy about traits which people will hold against you, and something to be said for living among people who won’t punish or exclude you for the traits you’ve got, especially if those traits are impossible or very expensive to change.