What repercussions do you imagine for someone you wouldn't think is high status?
1. You won't get treated fairly, someone with perceived high social status will get fairer treatment. This I personally witnessed in a hospital setting where the sole presence of someone "important" was notified in advance and they got more attention which means probably better attention to detail and therefore outcome in treatment. You might also receive worse service, such as in restaurants, flights, hotels. As people want to court and leave a better impression with someone in a social status
2. People will not respect you. As the article said status comes with respect. You might not judge others by their status but others will for sure judge you. They will talk behind their back about you and this will negatively affect any encounters with other people. Even if you don't judge others low social status will negatively discolor your interactions with others.
3. Also cause and effect might be inverted here. Low skill and ability in a specific domain usually leads to low status. Therefore other's treat you worse as your skills are of relative little importance in the domain. If someone in a tech setting can't solve trivial problems they will aquire low status and suffer in a multitude of ways. In the best case you will be ignored and assigned to tasks with relative little value. In the worst case you can't continue to work there. Just the fact that you have low social status should get you to worry. If you had better skill your social status would actually improve, at least to people that are in the same domain and value the particular skills needed there.
Either you suffer repercussions due to your low social status or you suffer repercussions due to the factors that lead to your status.
I had an absolutely massive post written but I think it might be easier to ask, what do you think a low status person is?
I think my examples address the questions or what do you think they miss? You suffer either because of low status or you have low status because you suffer of some deficiencies that other people think you have. For sure low status can also be arbitrary in many cases but it still has consequences.
I'm not from the US so the hospital example doesn't really apply to me, it's far more egalitarian here, but even in the US I think the above counterexample shows some cracks in the notion.
Furthermore, I don't think a lack of advantages are the same as repercussions. Repercussions are active negatives, where lack of advantages are inactive positives. This is specifically what I was asking about, and why I don't feel like these examples are getting at "repercussions".
Being treated worse is a repercussion. Being actively denied them is a repercussion and also an active negative in your definition. If you are keen on this distinction you can ignore the health care example. But the social consequences fall definetely in this category.
> a white couple waved guns at the protestors
If this is the case I'm thinking of, the protesters had broken down a gate and were trespassing on their property. What were they supposed to do in that situation? Risk their lives and property by putting themselves at the mercy of the mob?
> Black, can raise voice
That's a hell of a euphemism for "threatening to kill people". Apparently the subway riders felt that he was a real threat, because he was restrained by 3 people, and all of the passengers that have spoken up about it seemed to think it was necessary
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57521756
Mr Callahan described the demonstrators as a "racially mixed and peaceful group, including women and children", who had made a wrong turn on the way to their protest. There was no evidence the group was armed, he said.
https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was...
Video shows gate was intact when St. Louis couple pointed guns at protesters Videos and photographs show the couple pacing on their Portland Place property, periodically pointing the weapons at the crowd
For the Yelling I've seen a lot of people yelling about killing people. People act out, 'verbally'. Typically they calm down. Yelling didn't use to be a crime, especially with a death sentence.
Nobody is saying that social hierarchy doesn't ever matter, just that it can be largely ignored with minimal consequences.
I'm not goading you with a straw man. You are the one that made it.