Dear Davit Belkania

It is just my opinion which supported by the reality observed in my country.

Regards

I don't think discrimination will end ever until people change their thoughts. It is deeply rooted in our society.

I think it exists so far

Yes, I think that.

Personally, I think that meritocracy can carry gender/racial bias.

Meritocracy as we know stands for sorting people into positions and distributing awards according to the merits or talent (Scully 1997); it does/should not consider non-merit factors in this process (Castilla et al. 2010)... But it does not necessarily mean the exclusion of certain biases (gender/racial in our case). In this context, gender/racial quotas and or affirmative action can play an important role. Unfortunately, even these measures are not enough to cope with these biases. e.g. quoting from Castilla et al. (2010): "Recent empirical studies have found, however, that workplace inequality persists even with the adoption of merit-based pay programs (Castilla, 2008), affirmative action, and diversity policies (Kalev, Dobbin, and Kelly, 2006), or certain popular team and cross-training arrangements (Kalev, 2009)."

Seemingly, meritocracy is a system espousing merit, equality, and a bias free society. However, in reality, we have to agree with the English author, Salman Rushdi, who rightly observes that “Repression is a seamless garment; a society which is authoritarian in its social and sexual codes, which crushes its women beneath the intolerable burdens of honor and propriety, breeds repressions of other kinds as well.”

I think, because personal attitudes cant be changed

Meritocracy is only a concept - rule of/by those who have 'merit'. No perfect meritocracy actually exists. Therefore, actual racial and gender bias can and does exist in all societies, because we are all human, and prone to at least a little bias, of not a lot. No doubt the forms that non-merit based choices and actions can take are almost infinite, and the crucial question in real societies that wish to be merit based is "What kind of merit is most important and what kind of departures from merit are best avoided? "

All the answers I have seen so far seem pretty good to me!

What is meritocracy? Does it exist in reality? Is it applied today really? COVID could be an interesting stimulus for changing the dynamics, but will it do so?

gender/racial bias, we are speaking of power, what will modify and change power in a way that gender/racial bias can be exceeded and an equality society really and concretely established! My opinion is: to do so an enormeous exercise of critical analysis of what has been done through centuries can eventually modify the scenario, if this will ever be done! Sorry for not being so positive on all this!

I think so

It will take another say three or four generations to achieve meritocracy. Right now it is only been done as a token. It is like cancer, when it gets to stage 4, needs a miracle to heal. This present society as l see it is still dragging it feet and only paying eye service that says 'if people can see just 1 person of color achieving a merit, it is okay'. No it is not okay. One would think that Covid should wake our society up, No. Most people of color do not get the accolade or merit they deserve until after they pass on. Sorry, this is not meritocracy.

I think everyone who has contributed so far is basically correct. The major issue in a "meritocracy" is who gets to define merit, and at least in the US, Canada and Europe the people doing the defining are white males. This means that to them merit means the sort of things that are important to them, e.g. wealth, power, arrogance, playing the game by their rules. This explains both the gender bias and the racism.

In my case I don't identify as white although to most people I appear to be "white". When I got my job, other white males told me that there was no need to stand up for women and minorities, because I could be one of "them". They did not say this in so many words, but the messages were always the same, regardless of the political leanings of the person. It was always along the lines of "you know the rules", or "you know what makes one a success." This meant not being critical of the status quo, or asking questions in research that were outside the boundaries of what was "widely accepted", i.e. what all the white guys were doing.

In the US right now we are seeing what happens when we choose a white male as a leader, simply because he is wealthy and famous. Finally women, LGBTQ, and non-whites are standing up and demanding recognition, because even having had a Black President did not change the attitude of many white males. They prefer an incompetent one of their own to a very competent person of color or woman.

Maybe things will now start to change in a meaningful way. I hope so, but it looks like a hard fight.

Raymond Pierotti, you have said it all. In as much as l do not like to undermine anyone, but the truth is the truth. As someone of color, you wake up with it and go to sleep with it. If you do not play by the rules, you risk your career. You could be the best surgeon in a hospital, you will still be under a white nurse who was born while you were doing your internship to supervise you. What do you think this does to one's ego? You are perceived as a trouble maker if you ask ;why'? It goes on and on.

Dear Davit Belkania

They are still exist but not in the meritocracy.

Regards

Dear Yasser Fakri Mustafa , what are your arguments to support your stance. Are we referring to what it should be according to its definition or what we have in practice?

Dear Davit Belkania

It is just my opinion which supported by the reality observed in my country.

Regards

Yes, because meritocracy is a relative concept.

Yes, of course it is a world wide matter which still unsolved

Dear Davit Belkania

I do not think that racism or the separation of races exists widely, and if it exists, it will be in some countries and on the level of their culture according to their religious or ideological beliefs.

Old mental habits and prejudices die hard. Merit, gender and race are interactive criteria, but some women and persons of different colour or nationality still do not get the recognition they deserve.

It would improve the quality of answers if people included supporting evidence, or at least a deeper analysis, rather than simply one sentence opinions. I am not sure in what countries or universities Mr. Thanoon thinks racism and segregation are absent from, and he provides no supporting information. I agree that many people today are not overtly racist (it is no longer socially acceptable), however their actions and attitudes create a sort of de facto racism, which serves to separate or exclude women and people of color. This is the problem today, in the US we have a President and his party who deny being racist, while many of their actions are clearly racist in their impact. They hide behind arguments like All Lives Matter or "there are fine people on both sides", when these are dog whistles to the overtly racist in our society. Similar things happen regularly within universities or other scholarly communities.

In general, the "meritocratic" system, when operating under the assumption of equal opportunities, hides discriminatory prejudices of race and class more generally, and in many cases of gender. In Brazil, meritocracy preachers are generally against the system of positions reserved for African-Americans or indigenous people.

Yes, of course. It's a men's world with lots of inequity and meritocracy is still in paper.

There are three key concepts in your question: Racism, gender inequality and meritocracy.The visibility and prominence of these three concepts differ from clime to clime. Gender discrimination and meritocracy are visible elements in all climes while racial discrimination varies across climes.

Racism is usually visible in environments where we have different cultures/races co-existing together in large numbers.

Gender inequality has continued to be a major discourse world over as it is believed that men are culturally more advantaged than the women. This problem in my view however still persists because women are still not very supportive of themselves. They tend to project the male as a superior sex than themselves.

This view is however gradually changing in many societies today as we have philosophies that encourages merits above gender or race. Meritocracy ensures or promotes equality for all genders and race as persons are rewarded based on performance rather than colour, religion or gender.

As interesting as equality sounds, it is still overtly evident that in most societies, race and gender still plays a very significant role in who gets what as people consciously or unconsciously still favour certain races and gender above others. It is even more interesting in developing countries; it is even the people who discriminate against their own in favour of a foreigner who they tend to think is superior.

In a meritocracy there should not be any gender or racial bias but I am afraid that it exists. It's hard to detect, but I suspect it flies below the radar.

Dr. Lehr, I appreciate your perspective, but bias does not fly below the radar, it is often right out in the open. Often it manifests as discussions of teaching style or appropriateness of research questions. I have seen research that considers perspectives other than Western Science, described as "VooDoo Science" in tenure proceedings. I have also seen female colleagues described as unprofessional, because they speak up on social issues.

Thanks Dr. Pierott, It's just that i never witnessed any overt discrimination in hiring or promotion

during my career, though years after the fact female colleagues have told me some shocking stories of unacceptable conduct by some of their male colleagues.

Thank you for your response, Dr. Lehr. People are often reluctant to complain because it can have negative impacts on careers. What is necessary is that the rest of us stand up against such behavior.

I support and agree with Raymond Pierotti and Félix Pablo Friggeri

Following

I support and agree with Raymond Pierotti and Félix Pablo Friggeri

Ideally in a meritocracy there are no more gender and racial injustices. because meritocracy places more emphasis on ability, capacity and capability not on political connections. But in its implementation meritocracy depends on the political system and the culture of the people. For example, meritocracy in Indonesian political contestation is still colored by identity politics that leads to race, and a patriarchal culture system that makes it difficult for women to have economic access as capital to win victories in political constellation. The community chooses candidates because of their background and political partnership so candidates with integrity and achievements will be outdone by candidates who have more "popular" backgrounds to be chosen by the public.

Поддерживаю коллегу Джона, я тоже никогда не была свидетельницей какой-либо явной дискриминации при приеме на работу или продвижении по службе. В приоритете всегда талант, трудолюбие и усидчивость! И конечно любовь к своей профессии!

The problem with meritocracies (wonderful ideals or not) is who get to define merit. In my experience many people assume that merit means people just like themselves, which usually in the US and Europe means white males. It can also mean people who think like me, look like me, etc. Meritocracies are used to maintain the status quo and to resists attempts to diversify a faculty or any other organization.

Not much as in meritocracy merit matters most. Davit Belkania

In theory, it should not, but we know that in reality, human nature will always consider race and gender. That is why some countries that claim to be a meritocracy have never had a female president, etc. In fact, the question can be raised as to whether a true meritocracy can really exist.

Whoever pays the piper calls the tune. We are living in a patriarchy world and they will fight nail and tooth to keep it this way unfortunately. My gender is just coming into existence.