Talk:Minority

message: "Converse is also possible: for example, although oversea Chinese people are outnumbered by local residents, they tend to dominate economy and politics." 
I'd like some documentation on this, I don't know it to be the case. Sam Spade 10:04, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  moving sentance from article 

message: Yet another page with a politically correct (aka leftist) bias. Not everyone worships certain people for the sole reason they aren't white or male. --130.218.71.187
If you feel this way you should attempt to edit the page to clean the bias, or at least state some examples here of what the biases are on the page.--Bigplankton 04:54, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  bias 

message: I've removed the following:
: In recent decades the term minority has taken on a new meaning among the politically correct, being used to refer to a group with which they perceive to be worthy of special preferential treatment.  For instance, while numerically women outnumber men in most societies, they can be said in politically correct terms to be a minority, given their claim of inferior treatment compared to men. Some find this usage to be unhelpful or inaccurate.
This is not only unhelpful or inaccurate, it's also pointless. I'd even venture to say it's patent nonsense... If a group that is less numerous has control or power, that can be called preferential treatment, inequality, or even hegemony, oligarchy, ... but they do not automatically become a "majority" and the opposed ones "minorities", that just doesn't work that way. Political correctness means going out of one's way to avoid offending anyone, but that doesn't imply that it means talking nonsense. I'd really like to see some examples/sources for such a broken use of this terminology, esp. mainstream. --Joy [shallot] 21:26, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: majority is that segment of the population that [...], in a politically correct sense of the word, enjoys traditionally higher social status than other groups. For example, while men are outnumbered by women in the United States and many other countries, they are sometimes viewed as a "majority" due to their traditionally dominant social role.
This too. --Joy [shallot] 09:25, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  moved "PC" stuff from article 

message: I quote from the article: "All criteria for ethnicity have bearing on designating a minority — language, nationality, religion, culture, lifestyle, or sexual orientation".
Perhaps somebody could explain how exactly the "sexual orientation" criterion can help define ethnicity ?!?! Or perhaps someone could provide - at least - an example of which one ethnicity is defined (inter alia) by it's "sexual orientation" ?!
: I agree, I don't know about a single such case. Nikola 17:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ethnicity]] and [[sexual orientation]] 

message: I am considering changing the introductory section.  It lacks focus, presenting too many ideas that are better explored in sub-sections.  Also, the sociology section is inaccurate and needs a major overhaul. Even though this article is written by a number of people, there is no reason that it should look that way: this is the problem with the politics and government section...a patchwork quilt of ideas.
When one speaks of groups of individuals, there are two definitions of minority.  One is numerical; the other, sociological.  
Numerical minorities refer to groups that have fewer members than another group--called a majority group, or, simply, the majority.  This defintion has more relevance politically than sociologically.  The US Senate, for example, is comprised of 100 individuals, typically with one of two party affiliations, Republican and Democrat; if the Republican party holds 51 seats and the Democats 49, the Democrats are said to be the minority party.
The sociological definition of minority, on the other hand, is very different.  The definition of a minority group (sometimes called a subordinate group), as put forward by sociologist Louis Wirth--way back in 1945, but still considered classic--is "a group of people who, because of their physical or cultural characteristics, are singled out by others in the society in which they live for differential and unequal treatment, and who therefore regard themselves as objects of collective discrimination."  To avoid any confusion with the numerical definition, sociologists tend to use the term dominant group instead of majority group to describe the group who holds a disproportionate amount of social, political, and economic power (or, in terms of stratification, those that are at the top of the social hierarchy). 
To illustrate the difference between numerical and sociological minorities, consider South Africa. In 1970, "African" and "Coloured" peoples numbered approximately 24 million, a majority of the population. "Whites," numbering less than 4 million, were clearly a numerical minority.  However, social policies under the rubric of Apartheid both segregated African and Coloured peoples from Whites and limited their access to the same social rewards that Whites enjoyed. Overt discrimination by Whites--the dominant group in South African society--against African and Coloured peoples, define the latter as a sociological minority.
I am strongly proposing expunging the "Assumptions" section.  Why not just say "In recent years, with its declining white population, more people in the US have been confusing numerical minority with sociological minority. Hopefully, Wikipedia will serve to solve this problem..."  Just delete it alltogether.
Niko481 10:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the defintion of minority 

message: Instead of redirecting this article to minority group, I'm suggesting that it be merged instead.  I've offered a clearer, more concise definition and outlined the new article on minority groups to include groups not mentioned here.  The new article avoids the ambiguity with numerical minority that was present here.  Niko481 01:17, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with Minority group