The difference between racism and sexism is the different list of excuses used to justify each bigotry.
They are essentially the same; a desperate desire to hide one's own fear of having weaknesses and flaws, and therefore trying to project those things onto others.
Separating humans into groups based on their physical bodies is a way to fantasize that all those of this one race, or this one color, or this one sex, or this one anything, all have specific weaknesses and failings, and all members of this other group (race, sex, age, ancestry, height, hair color, "class", etc.) all share certain strengths and assets.
The difference between bigotry and actual oppression is the degree of belief in a certain bias in a given group or region. HOW MANY PEOPLE BELIEVE IT, PERPETUATE IT, or GO ALONG WITH IT BECAUSE OF ANXIETY OR FEAR? So in a country where there is oppression, then obviously one group will have power and another will be kept from obtaining power, resources, and positive reputation, and enough individuals will go along with that being "THE WAY THINGS ARE", either because they LIKE IT, or because they're AFRAID.
ONE OF THE BELIEFS THAT CONTROLLERS TRY TO CONVINCE OTHERS OF IS THAT ALL THE MEMBERS OF A CERTAIN GROUP SHARE THE SAME PREJUDICE AND BIGOTRY.
Believing that all members of an entire group are against you increases the fear and feeling of powerlessness, causes a person to stop seeing other people as "good" or "neutral", and increases the "hatred" factor.
THIS IS PART OF THE OPPRESSION PROCESS: SPREAD FEAR AND PREJUDICE SO THAT ONE MAY MORE EASILY DIVIDE AND CONQUER.
It's simply not true; if all males were "anti-female", then wherever there are males in "power", there would be no females who have rights; no males would even entertain the notion, never mind vote in favor of it.
If all females were "anti-male", then there would be no females who CARE ABOUT,
or CARE FOR,
male infants, male children, male adolescents, or adult men.
If all "Whites" were anti-"Black", then wherever there are "Whites", there would be no "Blacks" who are treated like human beings, and if all "Blacks" were anti-"White", then wherever there are "Blacks", there would be no "Whites" who are treated like human beings, etc.
HUMANS WHO SEEK EXCUSES TO TREAT OTHER HUMAN BEINGS BADLY OFTEN USE RACE AND ANCESTRY AS AN EXCUSE, AND TRY TO RALLY OTHERS TO HATE AGAINST THAT GROUP.
(It is important to note that in earlier eras in Western culture (and in this current era in many other countries) speaking out against racism, sexism, or slavery meant knowingly putting one's very livelihood and physical life on the line, and people did it (and do it now) ANYWAY. Because it's the right thing, because it's right, because it's a horrific thing to stand there and watch another person get treated horribly by another person, to stand there and allow it.)
The reasons that OPPRESSION is perpetuated are NOT SOLELY because the group IN POWER believes in their own superiority. Oppression is maintained and perpetuated because OTHERS in the country, including many members of the oppressed group, ALSO buy into that group's "superiority" and power.
In a very simplified analogy, but one that can be witnessed in many places, when adults BUY INTO the children in the school or region being "too hard to control", they end up ALLOWING those children to "take over" and run around behaving any way they can get away with behaving. Without the belief that the children have power, the adults would not have given the power up. This is a REAL and RAMPANT occurrence in modern society, and has happened over and over again throughout history. When a group of humans who are obsessed with domination over others GET TOGETHER and SCARE other groups into allowing them to dominate them, they are QUITE OFTEN successful. USUALLY, these groups will have some physical trait in common, such as skin color, ancestry, or gender, but often also AGE, one trait that seems to get overlooked.
It is quite true, that "Oppressors" have and DO, throughout human history, often gone as far as one can go with the use of violence and imprisonment against those they are trying to oppress.
However, in nearly every case, the success of their oppression lays in their ability to make people BELIEVE in both FEAR and HATRED.
The general myth in that region or country that many people there have bought into either subconsciously, or consciously, is that the group who holds power actually IS superior in some way.
Even if they don't believe that the group is innately superior, such as in intelligence, they can still believe that the individuals in the group are superior in force and strength. And that will keep enough people fearful enough to take the supposedly superior group so seriously that they don't think there's anything they can do, so it's not uncommon for various oppressed groups to caution: "don't rock the boat; it will only get you hurt"; and they will often prevent others from doing anything as well, including even TALKING ABOUT oppression.)
"Don't Rock The Boat"
A favorite saying of both oppressors and those who fear oppressors.
When a person believes that another person is superior to them, they tend not to challenge the person.
When a person believes in the superiority of one TYPE of person, they tend to treat those who are NOT that type of person as "inferior".
It can look much like treating one person as a PARENTAL figure, and another person as "one of the children".
The most common oppression in the human species is obviously against females.
(Which is NOT the same as all males having or wanting superior power.)
This power struggle and projection of superiority and inferiority based on SEX can be found in almost every country, nearly every culture, every race, in most religions, and in government, business, and education.
It crosses ALL "divides".
HOWEVER, the oppression against females DOES NOT MEAN that MALES are not ALSO oppressed, based on their sex. Males are ABSOLUTELY oppressed and controlled, just because they are MALES. They are most frequently oppressed by OTHER MALES who sit in positions of "power" and who are invested in KEEPING their "power".
Female oppression could not be so widespread if it was not for so many females buying the belief that males actually are superior. Many females will go along with this belief either unconsciously, because that's just what they were taught, how they were raised, and how they were indoctrinated, or with full awareness. Getting "ganged up on" or rejected by those around them who are supposed to be friends, family, and fellow citizens is the most common reason for women backing down from standing up for themselves or for other females; the consequences are often immediate, and can be very serious, even in relatively wealthy cultures in the West that pose as "moral", "equal", or "enlightened". This behavior coming from others starts early during childhood, and increases as a female child looks and sounds more and more like a "woman" as she gets older.
Many of the females who consciously go along with it are simply doing it so that they can have power over OTHER FEMALES, and use the existing dynamics of a male-biased culture to perpetuate this CONTROL.
Infantalizing other females is one of the common behaviors of women who seek control over women; treating other females as if they are less capable than males, or less capable than other women; treating other females as if they are weak, silly, unstable, inexperienced, uninformed, and undeserving of the same courtesy and respect given to other human beings (male or female) of the same age.
Women who do this will condescend to other females in similar ways that men will who are male-biased: talking "down" to other females whom they've targeted, trying to "prove" that another female is of bad character, or is incapable, weak, or stupid, and trying to render the other females' point of view as unqualified, crazy, or unfounded.
Obviously, MEN who also seek control over females are not going to stick up for a female who is being bullied by another female, because he has a similar motive and agenda.
So women who do this to other females (both children and adult females) usually feel safe in this behavior from consequences.
*Sadly, many women who use the dynamics of a male-biased culture to bully other females actually believe that because they are participating in the bullying of females, that they are accepted by the men around them as "one of they guys". There is a gap in their "logic"; they think that by performing the same behaviors and prejudice patterns, that they're creating their own membership in the "superior" group, in this case, anti-female-biased males, and are therefore fully accepted by them.
They don't seem to realize that anti-female-bias applies to ALL females, not just certain females.
This same kind of behavior (if you can't beat em, join em) can be seen in all manner of other forms of oppression as well, including racial and religions group oppression.
There is a term in American culture, more specifically in African-American culture, that refers to a person who purposely behaved in ways to win approval from oppressive Caucasians ("whites") from a novel of the same name by Harriet Beecher Stowe.
~("The term "Uncle Tom" is used as a derogatory epithet for an excessively subservient person, particularly when that person perceives their own lower-class status based on race. It is similarly used to negatively describe a person who betrays their own group by participating in its oppression, whether or not they do so willingly.
The popular negative connotation of "Uncle Tom" has largely been attributed to numerous derivative works inspired by Uncle Tom's Cabin in the decade after its release, rather than the original novel itself, whose title character is a more positive figure.These works lampooned and distorted the portrayal of Uncle Tom with politically loaded.American copyright law before 1856 did not give novel authors any control over derivative stage adaptations, so Stowe neither approved the adaptations nor profited from them.")
>>>If ONLY males believed in male superiority, there would be either much, much less oppression of females, or it would look much different than it does today.
Believing in the superiority of a group can mean actually believing that the members of the group are innately superior, OR, one can believe that they are TOO FORMIDABLE as a group, and as individuals, to risk offending.
Females can be (and are) taught to believe in male superiority, just like male children can be. They may also FEAR standing up for themselves, but that fear is learned, it's not automatic.
~If a given group, a region or a country, was biased for females and against males, then male children would be taught to believe in female superiority in the same way, for the same reasons: keeping the status quo, making sure that those who have power keep it.
People learn that they are a member of an oppressed group when they stand up for themselves against even just a random, seemingly trivial injustice or unfairness, but get invalidated, ignored, shut down, or further threatened or bullied by members of their own group.
Members of the supposedly "superior" group of course may try to shut them down, but it's when members of their OWN group shut them down or refuse to stand up with them or for them that "Oppression" reveals itself.
It is no different in regions that one race or ancestry keeps others oppressed, or in regions where one race or ancestry is oppressed by all of the others.
In order to understand oppression, one must understand that sexism and racism are TOOLS that oppressors use in order to get others to GO ALONG WITH THEM in their plays for power.
A PERSON WHO OPPRESS ANOTHER RACE DOES NOT ACTUALLY WANT ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THEIR OWN RACE TO HAVE POWER AND CONTROL, THEY JUST WANT IT FOR THEMSELVES.
A PERSON WHO OPPRESSES THE OTHER SEX DOES NOT ACTUALLY WANT ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THEIR OWN SEX TO HAVE POWER AND CONTROL, THEY JUST WANT IT FOR THEMSELVES.
Humans also use religion (and anti-religion) as an excuse for supremacy and oppression of others.All oppression comes from the same origin.
Control-seeking humans will ALSO USE the oppression or past oppression of their own group as a weapon to try to control other people, both people of their OWN group, and people of other groups (race, sex, religion, etc.)
Projecting SHAME onto others for the oppressive actions of others of the same race, sex, age group, or ancestry is a common tactic,
as well as projecting SHAME onto those of their own race, sex, or group who refuse to go along with HATRED or attempts to "oppress BACK".
HOW FAR DOES IT GO?
If an individual person is seeking "evidence" to show that one group is superior, or that another group is inferior, they will do that WHEREVER they are, and WHOEVER is around them.
So for example if Jason (who seeks to feel naturally superior) lives in New York, he would be surrounded by nearly every type of human being that can be found on the planet. Jason can simply pick any "type" of human being to label as "inferior".
So while Jason is living in NYC, he chooses a couple of groups to be "inferior": women of all races, and anyone of Asian or blond-haired ancestry. There are women of all races all around him, and there are also both male and female Asians and blond-haired people all around him, all the time. He can get his fix of feeling superior just by walking out of his front door.
But when Jason moves out of NYC to a smaller town in a Northern state, there are no Asians there. So now Jason changes his bias to being against Hispanics, because there are a few Mexican families there, and still blond-haired people and women of all races.
When Jason moves to a different country, he finds that there are no blond-haired people, and all of the people have dark skin, like himself. So Jason can still get his "fix" of belief in his own superiority from being around women, but his ancestry bias doesn't work so well.
However, Jason finds that he is able to break down people into sub-groups INSIDE of this group of "dark-skinned" people, and finds satisfaction for his desire for supremacy that way.
So those who are of one certain ancestry within this group are supposed to be "superior", and this other group is "inferior".
Jason finds that there are others like him in the group who use things like shades of skin color, subtle differences in speech, and exactly what part of town a person lives in to separate people into sub-groups and cast "inferiority" on them.
Jason also finds satisfaction in separating people within this group of people by specific beliefs, and by the possible financial status of a person's family.
(Jason thinks he knows how much money other people have by the way they look and act.)
When Jason's JOB causes him to have to move to a compound where there are ONLY men, who all receive similar pay, AND who are all of the same ancestry, at first he feels VERY insecure; there are no people who he can point his finger at and call "OTHER", so he doesn't know how to get his "fix" of superiority.
Worse still for Jason's supremacy addiction, he is not the most skilled nor the most experienced, so he can't use either of those; he's starting to fear that he won't be able to get his fix.
Eventually, he finds that most of the people there who are like himself (seeking ways to feel superior) tend to bad-mouth the business-hierarchy in his company.
After a while, bad-mouthing the "higher-ups" wears thin, especially since they rarely come around and show their faces, so Jason starts separating the other men in his work-group into even smaller sub-categories.
First, Jason notices that a couple of his co-worker men have different hair styles, so that's the first thing he tries to use to separate his co-workers into sub-groups that are either superior (like him) or inferior (not like him).
Then he notices that some of the men are shorter in height than he is, so he starts trying to insult their stature. He implies that they're not as capable as he is, that they're weaker than he is, and that they're emotionally or mentally less stable and secure (ironically).
When that doesn't work well enough to give him the "fix" he craves, he starts honing in the weight and body types of his male co-workers. He singles out the couple of men who are a little heavier around the mid-section, making fun of their weight, implying that they're in poorer health, and that they have weaker self-control.
Then Jason notices that there are a couple of men who have slender builds, so he starts making subtle and not-so-subtle remarks insulting their bodies, implying that they're "breakable" like "twigs", and not as strong as everyone else.
Jason tries to get others to join with him whenever he targets someone to project inferiority onto.
After a while, he notices that there are others in the group who already have separated the men by subtle political differences, and he jumps on that bandwagon, although he doesn't actually care one way or the other about those political beliefs.
When the group has become divided enough for there to be two DISTINCT sub-groups, based on "political beliefs", then Jason starts to separate the men inside of these groups, and make "his" sub-group the "superior" one.
Jason will continue to create excuses to split others into groups, and sub-groups, and sub-categories, and sub-sub-groups, as long as he lives, because he does not realize that he
DOES NOT FEEL LIKE A VALID HUMAN BEING unless he feels like he is a member of a "superior" group. And he will use anything he can in order to get that "fix" that he craves.
Jason associates being "superior" with having power and control over the group, over RESOURCES, and over decision-making.
Jason feels that if he's not one of the "superior" people, then someone else WILL BE, automatically. Because this is how JASON thinks, he assumes that everyone else thinks the same way, and that therefore everyone else is competing for superiority, control, and power.
Whatever group, sub-group, or sub-category Jason decides he belongs to, that's the group he sees as "deserving power" and "deserving credit" because they are "superior" in so many ways.
They are essentially the same; a desperate desire to hide one's own fear of having weaknesses and flaws, and therefore trying to project those things onto others.
Separating humans into groups based on their physical bodies is a way to fantasize that all those of this one race, or this one color, or this one sex, or this one anything, all have specific weaknesses and failings, and all members of this other group (race, sex, age, ancestry, height, hair color, "class", etc.) all share certain strengths and assets.
The difference between bigotry and actual oppression is the degree of belief in a certain bias in a given group or region. HOW MANY PEOPLE BELIEVE IT, PERPETUATE IT, or GO ALONG WITH IT BECAUSE OF ANXIETY OR FEAR? So in a country where there is oppression, then obviously one group will have power and another will be kept from obtaining power, resources, and positive reputation, and enough individuals will go along with that being "THE WAY THINGS ARE", either because they LIKE IT, or because they're AFRAID.
ONE OF THE BELIEFS THAT CONTROLLERS TRY TO CONVINCE OTHERS OF IS THAT ALL THE MEMBERS OF A CERTAIN GROUP SHARE THE SAME PREJUDICE AND BIGOTRY.
Believing that all members of an entire group are against you increases the fear and feeling of powerlessness, causes a person to stop seeing other people as "good" or "neutral", and increases the "hatred" factor.
THIS IS PART OF THE OPPRESSION PROCESS: SPREAD FEAR AND PREJUDICE SO THAT ONE MAY MORE EASILY DIVIDE AND CONQUER.
It's simply not true; if all males were "anti-female", then wherever there are males in "power", there would be no females who have rights; no males would even entertain the notion, never mind vote in favor of it.
If all females were "anti-male", then there would be no females who CARE ABOUT,
or CARE FOR,
male infants, male children, male adolescents, or adult men.
If all "Whites" were anti-"Black", then wherever there are "Whites", there would be no "Blacks" who are treated like human beings, and if all "Blacks" were anti-"White", then wherever there are "Blacks", there would be no "Whites" who are treated like human beings, etc.
HUMANS WHO SEEK EXCUSES TO TREAT OTHER HUMAN BEINGS BADLY OFTEN USE RACE AND ANCESTRY AS AN EXCUSE, AND TRY TO RALLY OTHERS TO HATE AGAINST THAT GROUP.
(It is important to note that in earlier eras in Western culture (and in this current era in many other countries) speaking out against racism, sexism, or slavery meant knowingly putting one's very livelihood and physical life on the line, and people did it (and do it now) ANYWAY. Because it's the right thing, because it's right, because it's a horrific thing to stand there and watch another person get treated horribly by another person, to stand there and allow it.)
In a very simplified analogy, but one that can be witnessed in many places, when adults BUY INTO the children in the school or region being "too hard to control", they end up ALLOWING those children to "take over" and run around behaving any way they can get away with behaving. Without the belief that the children have power, the adults would not have given the power up. This is a REAL and RAMPANT occurrence in modern society, and has happened over and over again throughout history. When a group of humans who are obsessed with domination over others GET TOGETHER and SCARE other groups into allowing them to dominate them, they are QUITE OFTEN successful. USUALLY, these groups will have some physical trait in common, such as skin color, ancestry, or gender, but often also AGE, one trait that seems to get overlooked.
It is quite true, that "Oppressors" have and DO, throughout human history, often gone as far as one can go with the use of violence and imprisonment against those they are trying to oppress.
However, in nearly every case, the success of their oppression lays in their ability to make people BELIEVE in both FEAR and HATRED.
The general myth in that region or country that many people there have bought into either subconsciously, or consciously, is that the group who holds power actually IS superior in some way.
Even if they don't believe that the group is innately superior, such as in intelligence, they can still believe that the individuals in the group are superior in force and strength. And that will keep enough people fearful enough to take the supposedly superior group so seriously that they don't think there's anything they can do, so it's not uncommon for various oppressed groups to caution: "don't rock the boat; it will only get you hurt"; and they will often prevent others from doing anything as well, including even TALKING ABOUT oppression.)
"Don't Rock The Boat"
A favorite saying of both oppressors and those who fear oppressors.
When a person believes that another person is superior to them, they tend not to challenge the person.
When a person believes in the superiority of one TYPE of person, they tend to treat those who are NOT that type of person as "inferior".
It can look much like treating one person as a PARENTAL figure, and another person as "one of the children".
The most common oppression in the human species is obviously against females.
(Which is NOT the same as all males having or wanting superior power.)
This power struggle and projection of superiority and inferiority based on SEX can be found in almost every country, nearly every culture, every race, in most religions, and in government, business, and education.
It crosses ALL "divides".
HOWEVER, the oppression against females DOES NOT MEAN that MALES are not ALSO oppressed, based on their sex. Males are ABSOLUTELY oppressed and controlled, just because they are MALES. They are most frequently oppressed by OTHER MALES who sit in positions of "power" and who are invested in KEEPING their "power".
Female oppression could not be so widespread if it was not for so many females buying the belief that males actually are superior. Many females will go along with this belief either unconsciously, because that's just what they were taught, how they were raised, and how they were indoctrinated, or with full awareness. Getting "ganged up on" or rejected by those around them who are supposed to be friends, family, and fellow citizens is the most common reason for women backing down from standing up for themselves or for other females; the consequences are often immediate, and can be very serious, even in relatively wealthy cultures in the West that pose as "moral", "equal", or "enlightened". This behavior coming from others starts early during childhood, and increases as a female child looks and sounds more and more like a "woman" as she gets older.
Many of the females who consciously go along with it are simply doing it so that they can have power over OTHER FEMALES, and use the existing dynamics of a male-biased culture to perpetuate this CONTROL.
Infantalizing other females is one of the common behaviors of women who seek control over women; treating other females as if they are less capable than males, or less capable than other women; treating other females as if they are weak, silly, unstable, inexperienced, uninformed, and undeserving of the same courtesy and respect given to other human beings (male or female) of the same age.
Women who do this will condescend to other females in similar ways that men will who are male-biased: talking "down" to other females whom they've targeted, trying to "prove" that another female is of bad character, or is incapable, weak, or stupid, and trying to render the other females' point of view as unqualified, crazy, or unfounded.
Obviously, MEN who also seek control over females are not going to stick up for a female who is being bullied by another female, because he has a similar motive and agenda.
So women who do this to other females (both children and adult females) usually feel safe in this behavior from consequences.
*Sadly, many women who use the dynamics of a male-biased culture to bully other females actually believe that because they are participating in the bullying of females, that they are accepted by the men around them as "one of they guys". There is a gap in their "logic"; they think that by performing the same behaviors and prejudice patterns, that they're creating their own membership in the "superior" group, in this case, anti-female-biased males, and are therefore fully accepted by them.
They don't seem to realize that anti-female-bias applies to ALL females, not just certain females.
This same kind of behavior (if you can't beat em, join em) can be seen in all manner of other forms of oppression as well, including racial and religions group oppression.
There is a term in American culture, more specifically in African-American culture, that refers to a person who purposely behaved in ways to win approval from oppressive Caucasians ("whites") from a novel of the same name by Harriet Beecher Stowe.
~("The term "Uncle Tom" is used as a derogatory epithet for an excessively subservient person, particularly when that person perceives their own lower-class status based on race. It is similarly used to negatively describe a person who betrays their own group by participating in its oppression, whether or not they do so willingly.
The popular negative connotation of "Uncle Tom" has largely been attributed to numerous derivative works inspired by Uncle Tom's Cabin in the decade after its release, rather than the original novel itself, whose title character is a more positive figure.These works lampooned and distorted the portrayal of Uncle Tom with politically loaded.American copyright law before 1856 did not give novel authors any control over derivative stage adaptations, so Stowe neither approved the adaptations nor profited from them.")
>>>If ONLY males believed in male superiority, there would be either much, much less oppression of females, or it would look much different than it does today.
Believing in the superiority of a group can mean actually believing that the members of the group are innately superior, OR, one can believe that they are TOO FORMIDABLE as a group, and as individuals, to risk offending.
Females can be (and are) taught to believe in male superiority, just like male children can be. They may also FEAR standing up for themselves, but that fear is learned, it's not automatic.
~If a given group, a region or a country, was biased for females and against males, then male children would be taught to believe in female superiority in the same way, for the same reasons: keeping the status quo, making sure that those who have power keep it.
People learn that they are a member of an oppressed group when they stand up for themselves against even just a random, seemingly trivial injustice or unfairness, but get invalidated, ignored, shut down, or further threatened or bullied by members of their own group.
Members of the supposedly "superior" group of course may try to shut them down, but it's when members of their OWN group shut them down or refuse to stand up with them or for them that "Oppression" reveals itself.
It is no different in regions that one race or ancestry keeps others oppressed, or in regions where one race or ancestry is oppressed by all of the others.
In order to understand oppression, one must understand that sexism and racism are TOOLS that oppressors use in order to get others to GO ALONG WITH THEM in their plays for power.
A PERSON WHO OPPRESS ANOTHER RACE DOES NOT ACTUALLY WANT ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THEIR OWN RACE TO HAVE POWER AND CONTROL, THEY JUST WANT IT FOR THEMSELVES.
A PERSON WHO OPPRESSES THE OTHER SEX DOES NOT ACTUALLY WANT ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THEIR OWN SEX TO HAVE POWER AND CONTROL, THEY JUST WANT IT FOR THEMSELVES.
Humans also use religion (and anti-religion) as an excuse for supremacy and oppression of others.All oppression comes from the same origin.
Control-seeking humans will ALSO USE the oppression or past oppression of their own group as a weapon to try to control other people, both people of their OWN group, and people of other groups (race, sex, religion, etc.)
Projecting SHAME onto others for the oppressive actions of others of the same race, sex, age group, or ancestry is a common tactic,
as well as projecting SHAME onto those of their own race, sex, or group who refuse to go along with HATRED or attempts to "oppress BACK".
HOW FAR DOES IT GO?
If an individual person is seeking "evidence" to show that one group is superior, or that another group is inferior, they will do that WHEREVER they are, and WHOEVER is around them.
So for example if Jason (who seeks to feel naturally superior) lives in New York, he would be surrounded by nearly every type of human being that can be found on the planet. Jason can simply pick any "type" of human being to label as "inferior".
So while Jason is living in NYC, he chooses a couple of groups to be "inferior": women of all races, and anyone of Asian or blond-haired ancestry. There are women of all races all around him, and there are also both male and female Asians and blond-haired people all around him, all the time. He can get his fix of feeling superior just by walking out of his front door.
But when Jason moves out of NYC to a smaller town in a Northern state, there are no Asians there. So now Jason changes his bias to being against Hispanics, because there are a few Mexican families there, and still blond-haired people and women of all races.
When Jason moves to a different country, he finds that there are no blond-haired people, and all of the people have dark skin, like himself. So Jason can still get his "fix" of belief in his own superiority from being around women, but his ancestry bias doesn't work so well.
However, Jason finds that he is able to break down people into sub-groups INSIDE of this group of "dark-skinned" people, and finds satisfaction for his desire for supremacy that way.
So those who are of one certain ancestry within this group are supposed to be "superior", and this other group is "inferior".
Jason finds that there are others like him in the group who use things like shades of skin color, subtle differences in speech, and exactly what part of town a person lives in to separate people into sub-groups and cast "inferiority" on them.
Jason also finds satisfaction in separating people within this group of people by specific beliefs, and by the possible financial status of a person's family.
(Jason thinks he knows how much money other people have by the way they look and act.)
When Jason's JOB causes him to have to move to a compound where there are ONLY men, who all receive similar pay, AND who are all of the same ancestry, at first he feels VERY insecure; there are no people who he can point his finger at and call "OTHER", so he doesn't know how to get his "fix" of superiority.
Worse still for Jason's supremacy addiction, he is not the most skilled nor the most experienced, so he can't use either of those; he's starting to fear that he won't be able to get his fix.
Eventually, he finds that most of the people there who are like himself (seeking ways to feel superior) tend to bad-mouth the business-hierarchy in his company.
After a while, bad-mouthing the "higher-ups" wears thin, especially since they rarely come around and show their faces, so Jason starts separating the other men in his work-group into even smaller sub-categories.
First, Jason notices that a couple of his co-worker men have different hair styles, so that's the first thing he tries to use to separate his co-workers into sub-groups that are either superior (like him) or inferior (not like him).
Then he notices that some of the men are shorter in height than he is, so he starts trying to insult their stature. He implies that they're not as capable as he is, that they're weaker than he is, and that they're emotionally or mentally less stable and secure (ironically).
When that doesn't work well enough to give him the "fix" he craves, he starts honing in the weight and body types of his male co-workers. He singles out the couple of men who are a little heavier around the mid-section, making fun of their weight, implying that they're in poorer health, and that they have weaker self-control.
Then Jason notices that there are a couple of men who have slender builds, so he starts making subtle and not-so-subtle remarks insulting their bodies, implying that they're "breakable" like "twigs", and not as strong as everyone else.
Jason tries to get others to join with him whenever he targets someone to project inferiority onto.
After a while, he notices that there are others in the group who already have separated the men by subtle political differences, and he jumps on that bandwagon, although he doesn't actually care one way or the other about those political beliefs.
When the group has become divided enough for there to be two DISTINCT sub-groups, based on "political beliefs", then Jason starts to separate the men inside of these groups, and make "his" sub-group the "superior" one.
Jason will continue to create excuses to split others into groups, and sub-groups, and sub-categories, and sub-sub-groups, as long as he lives, because he does not realize that he
DOES NOT FEEL LIKE A VALID HUMAN BEING unless he feels like he is a member of a "superior" group. And he will use anything he can in order to get that "fix" that he craves.
Jason associates being "superior" with having power and control over the group, over RESOURCES, and over decision-making.
Jason feels that if he's not one of the "superior" people, then someone else WILL BE, automatically. Because this is how JASON thinks, he assumes that everyone else thinks the same way, and that therefore everyone else is competing for superiority, control, and power.
Whatever group, sub-group, or sub-category Jason decides he belongs to, that's the group he sees as "deserving power" and "deserving credit" because they are "superior" in so many ways.
