this is another red herring. there have been *many* studies about red-lining in the us, the practice where non-whites are steered away from white neighborhoods. similarly whites have been shown to be racist when an equally qualified black/brown/yellow person shows up for an interview and is not given a chance compared to a white person.
actually, i read some reports about this 'study' in a letters to the editor in the economist (and i saw kk92's post too) which claimed they used 'typical low-caste surnames' and 'mohammedan names'.
this is bullshit.
1. there are no 'typical low-caste surnames' in the entire south of india.
2. in fact, it is often factual that someone who came in through reservations, such as a mohammedan, may have cut some corners
3. if you sent similar letters in the us, with a very black-sounding name, a mohammedan name, a jewish name, a hindu name, and compared the responses you'd get for a lily-white WASP name, i'd bet the results would be the same: 90% of the mohammedans and hindus, and 75% of the jews and chinese, would be rejected. unless they do that 'control' experiment, no point yammering about india.
these are once again those motivated idiot social scientists (most probably with JNU links in india, and wendy o'doniger links in the US), who are confusing cause and effect. it's not because of casteism that this happens in india. it's because it's normal for people anywhere to be prejudiced. it's no worse than the 'casteism' and prejudice in the US.
On 10/27/07, Dola
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around