Stereotypes exist because they tend to be true

Status
Not open for further replies.
What do YOU think?

No, I don't think that would be racist.

You're going to need to be more specific here. Find us a negative racial stereotype that is true 90% of the time.

That number, the 90%, is what I'm trying to base the discussion on.

To simplify the question further: What x% of a population would have to fit a stereotype for it to be considered true/valid/etc?
 
I thought you did, based on:

implying you agree with the OP

I can't speculate on all Indian people, just the customers of my store. But in doing so, I have stereotyped them. Working there 6 years in a position of authority, I believe I can make a comment on this subject.

Now I'm not judging their behavior. I love a paying customer as much as the next retail manager. However, I have always found cultural differences to be an interesting topic.

Perhaps the Indian customers I am referencing are equally fascinated by the reason this white guy (me) doesn't want to make a better deal for them at the register.

It's universal to want to save money, and I suppose some groups of people are more up front about it.

Again, just my experience. No harm meant.
 
You should have used one of the stereotypes that are for some reason allowed to be used with impunity, normally disguised as an annoyingly unoriginal joke, and often with very little relation to the topic at hand.

British people have bad teeth
Canadians are obssessed with maple syrup
The French surrender easily

All bizarrely acceptable

The fact of the matter is, society dictates to a degree the way that we act and live our lives. That is not debatable to me. So a fair percentage of stereotypes clearly have a basis in fact, even if people don't want to admit it. Some are positive, some are negative. Some are so commonly applicable that you can make fair assumptions, some are exceptionally wide of the mark. Some used to be undeniably common traits amongst the people they pertain to but have since become irrelevant, some were never applicable and simply used to easily treat people with disdain.
 
No, I don't think that would be racist.



That number, the 90%, is what I'm trying to base the discussion on.

To simplify the question further: What x% of a population would have to fit a stereotype for it to be considered true/valid/etc?

But you just asked us:

Would it be racist to believe in a negative racial stereotype which is true, for argument's sake, 90% of the time?

I'm confused. Are you asking us if we'd be racist against evil Orcs? Because that's seriously the only case in which I could imagine a stereotype being close to 90% "true".
 
You should have used one of the stereotypes that are for some reason allowed to be used with impunity, normally disguised as an annoyingly unoriginal joke, and often with very little relation to the topic at hand.

British people have bad teeth
Canadians are obssessed with maple syrup
The French surrender easily

All bizarrely acceptable

The fact of the matter is, society dictates to a degree the way that we act and live our lives. That is not debatable to me. So a fair percentage of stereotypes clearly have a basis in fact, even if people don't want to admit it. Some are positive, some are negative. Some are so commonly applicable that you can make fair assumptions, some are exceptionally wide of the mark. Some used to be undeniably common traits amongst the people they pertain to but have since become irrelevant, some were never applicable and simply used to easily treat people with disdain.

I like this post.
 
I took a communication class, and the topic of stereotypes came up in the curriculum and the professor's thesis was similar to OP's. Stereotypes exist for a reason, be aware of them, but that it's wrong to judge individuals based on a stereotype.

The one specific example I remember was the stereotype that all Jewish people are rich. Well this professor, who happened to be Jewish, cited some govt statistic and the average American Jewish household does have a much higher net worth than an average non-Jewish American household. It was almost twice as high IIRC.


As an american Jew I can say I'm not surprised at the statistic. Personally I attribute it to cultural disparities, namely more emphasis put on education as a population than larger populations (similar to asian immigrants in this respect).

Plus being jewish affords you 'access' to a sort of existing network where frankly Jews are inclined to help Jews. I have been given what I consider to be special treatment by strangers after they've found out that I'm Jewish. Jews who may at first see me as just another job candidate or just another intern etc etc always perk up and start buddying up to me when they find out I'm jewish. While I believe that happens in lots of communities it just happens to be that since Jews worked their way high up into the institutions of society (law, medicine, politics, the arts, finance etc), that the Jewish network is simply the better one to have.

I think that can be in line with OP's point, that stereotypes are a kind of bigoted heuristics in which people simplify their worldview by attaching cultural affectations to general populations based on some similarity, like skin color.

To say that black people are bad tippers is absolutely a stereotype, absolutely racist and absolutely untrue. However, most people I've known in the service industry has had disproportionately bad tipping experiences with black customers. This is anecdotal of course, and was never quantified a l a science experiment of course. The truth could be that a certain socioeconomic and cultural subset of people, some of most of whom happen to be black, don't have tipping as a part of their cultural etiquette, however it is EASY to see how such situations, coupled with peoples tendencies to be lazy and over-simplify for the sake of expedience, leads to stereotyping.
 
You should have used one of the stereotypes that are for some reason allowed to be used with impunity, normally disguised as an annoyingly unoriginal joke, and often with very little relation to the topic at hand.

British people have bad teeth
Canadians are obssessed with maple syrup
The French surrender easily

All bizarrely acceptable

The fact of the matter is, society dictates to a degree the way that we act and live our lives. That is not debatable to me. So a fair percentage of stereotypes clearly have a basis in fact, even if people don't want to admit it. Some are positive, some are negative. Some are so commonly applicable that you can make fair assumptions, some are exceptionally wide of the mark. Some used to be undeniably common traits amongst the people they pertain to but have since become irrelevant, some were never applicable and simply used to easily treat people with disdain.

I'm going to give you a list. And I want you to list the first stereotype that comes to mind for each group:

Women:
Men:
White people:
Black People:
Asian people:
Native American people:
Arab people:
Jewish people:
 
You're going to need to be more specific here. Find us a negative racial stereotype that is true 90% of the time.

3zwbV.jpg


I don't know if I'd label it as negative though.
 
But to be fair, people hold assumptions about others all the time, consciously and unconsciously. Getting rid of stereotypes altogether is probably impossible.

In my case, I try not to hold stereotypes that aren't productive in any light (mostly racial/gender ones, for example), and try to be as neutral as I can to people in general, without assuming certain things at first. But I know there are cases where certain groups of people (not necessarily tied to an existing 'group') have behaviors/traits/etc. that can be shown through collected data.

I mostly have issue with the 'watermelon' type stereotypes. Those do no one any good.
 
I'm going to give you a list. And I want you to list the first stereotype that comes to mind for each group:

Women:
Men:
White people:
Black People:
Asian people:
Native American people:
Arab people:
Jewish people:

Most of them I only have experience from media, normally comedies, so a hefty ban is coming to me if I answer them. I realise that sounds like I'm bottling it,and that's because I am. Also, most of the things that come to my head do so because of the way their stereotypes are lampooned.
 
But you just asked us:



I'm confused. Are you asking us if we'd be racist against evil Orcs? Because that's seriously the only case in which I could imagine a stereotype being close to 90% "true".
Would it be racist to believe in a negative racial stereotype which is true, for argument's sake, 90% of the time?


I was just trying to make the discussion simpler, sorry my bad. But that's not the real question I'm interested in.

Forget the 90% figure.

Now what WOULD be an acceptable figure?
Is it something we can all agree on?
If its 50% for you, why?
If its 100% for you, why?
That's what I'd like to know :)

What x% of a population would have to fit a stereotype for it to be considered true/valid/etc?

I edited this in at the top of the OP as well to reduce the confusion of other people.
 
Everything is on a gradient.

Genetics and genetic characteristics are a scientific fact. The existence of different cultures and cultural characteristics throughout the world is also a fact. But everything is on a gradient. And the gradient is never completely black and white.

I get really interested in these types of topics, but unfortunately it's very difficult to discuss them with people due to the knee jerk reactions that occur as a result of the cognitive dissonance that takes place when our values and beliefs conflict with what science, facts or "offensive" generalizations that may have a little bit (or a lot) of truth to them are telling us. I struggle with this quite a bit myself when I'm forced to question and re-evaluate values and beliefs that I've taken for granted most of my life.
 
Fiery, please don't think that I'm dancing around your point. However, those two things you just typed out about raising children and family are as you yourself put it "From Asian households". Now whether that's true or not, I can't say/ Because I've frankly never heard any of my Asian friends make such a remark. Still. Even if it is true, such a stereotype is harboured my a minority against a majority. It has no power.

Who says minorities can't have power? Minorities aren't as disempowered as you like to imagine, even at the voting booth.

Not to mention there is a massive rest of the world out there that isn't America. The whole concept of "minority" and "majority" is incredibly Western-centric.

If there's one thing I agree with you, it's that these dialogues we're having tend to be incredibly, incredibly Western-centric. They are dominated by Western history, norms, philosophies, and concepts which are in no way universal. Left-centered dialogue suffers from this to a more obnoxious degree because of how much they believe themselves to be freed from the norms of Western perspective and planted in a universal garden.
 
British people have bad teeth
Canadians are obssessed with maple syrup
The French surrender easily

All bizarrely acceptable
Bizarrely acceptable? Canadians and maple syrup "stereotype" is true, for one. Canada is the #1 exporter by far. Not to mention the billion dollar, underground maple syrup black market.

I think you can make a value judgement between innocuous stereotypes and those that marginalize. Thinking a British person has bad teeth is not worst thing one can stereotype about a group of people.
 
Stereotypes are 'true'.
Marketing researches and sociological and anthropological study on trends will show that too.

The thing is... the application of it.

If you take a unique little flake of person, and you move up with selected characteristics, you will find groups of people that match it.
Now, if you take a "stereotype" and move down, as if every person that contains enough items to fit that category must contain ALL items, it most likely won't.
 
Most of them I only have experience from media, normally comedies, so a hefty ban is coming to me if I answer them. I realise that sounds like I'm bottling it,and that's because I am. Also, most of the things that come to my head do so because of the way their stereotypes are lampooned.

Okay, that's fine. Could you at-least give me your white stereotype though?

Who says minorities can't have power? Minorities aren't as disempowered as you like to imagine, even at the voting booth.

Not to mention there is a massive rest of the world out there that isn't America. The whole concept of "minority" and "majority" is incredibly Western-centric.

If there's one thing I agree with you, it's that these dialogues we're having tend to be incredibly, incredibly Western-centric. They are dominated by Western history, norms, philosophies, and concepts which are in no way universal even when the Left pretends they are.

Agreed. My take on this is that stereotypes are inherently negative. There is no such thing as a "positive stereotype". because you are automatically assuming way too much about a person without even getting to know them. I am even guilty of this on many occasions where I write someone off as "dumb" only to later learn that they;d run circles around me in academia.
 
Stereotypes are 'true'.
Marketing researches and sociological and anthropological study on trends will show that too.

The thing is... the application of it.

If you take a unique little flake of person, and you move up with selected characteristics, you will find groups of people that match it.
Now, if you take a "stereotype" and move down, as if every person that contains enough items to fit that category must contain ALL items, it most likely won't.

Could you elaborate a bit? I don't think I understood very well.

Do you mean 'a set of characteristics' by 'stereotype'?
 
I was just trying to make the discussion simpler, sorry my bad. But that's not the real question I'm interested in.

Forget the 90% figure.

Now what WOULD be an acceptable figure?
Is it something we can all agree on?
If its 50% for you, why?
If its 100% for you, why?
That's what I'd like to know :)



I edited this in at the top of the OP as well to reduce the confusion of other people.

So you're asking us if it would be ok to use racial stereotypes in a fantasy world where not would stereotypes be true, they'd be quantifiable? I can't wrap my head around this.
 
British people have bad teeth

Everyone has bad teeth. Americans have for whatever reason placed high societal value on straight teeth, therefore we allocate resources to get braces and to get them fixed. My understanding is that Brits just don't care as much, so in the end more Brits have 'bad' (normal) teeth, thus the stereotype.
 
Everyone has bad teeth. Americans have for whatever reason placed high societal value on straight teeth, therefore we allocate resources to get braces and to get them fixed. My understanding is that Brits just don't care as much, so in the end more Brits have 'bad' (normal) teeth, thus the stereotype.

Some folks around me think it's weird how much Americans seem to care about straight teeth and the like.

Lots of 'bad teeth' here in Japan.
 
That number, the 90%, is what I'm trying to base the discussion on.

Then you probably shouldn't be using the word "stereotypes." That term doesn't carry the connotation "correct 90% of the time."

Slight reframe: is it acceptable to assume something about members of a population, when that thing is true of 90% of the members of that population?

Let's invent an example and say that 90% of Lusitanians wear socks to bed. If you meet a Lusitanian, is it all right to ask them what type of socks they usually wear when they go to bed?

Alternately, a negative example. If the proportion of innocent people in jail is a randomly distributed 10%, and you meet someone who just got out of jail, is it reasonable to assume they committed a crime?

I would say yes in both examples, though depending on why you wanted the information, it would probably be wise to wait for further evidence. But knowing nothing else, you could start with a 90% probability and go from there.

Why are stereotypes problematic? Because the numbers are enormously skewed on the way to your brain from real life. Let's say that your "black people don't tip" example is actually true. What would that mean? Probably something along the lines of: 25% of black restaurant-goers are bad tippers, while 20% of restaurant-goers in general are bad tippers. Trouble is, your brain won't see it that way. Your brain, once the slight difference has been brought to its notice, will engage in confirmation bias and will notice cases where black people don't tip more than cases where black people do tip, or cases where other restaurant-goers don't tip. In other words, your brain will take a slight difference and elevate it to a rule of thumb. From "black people are slightly disproportionately bad tippers" to "black people are bad tippers."

Plus, your brain will go directly to conclusions, will not pass go, will not wait for further evidence.

This is why we are generally discouraged from stereotyping. It's true that stereotypes might have a seed of truth, and it would be false to claim that all stereotypes are wrong, or that there are no differences whatsoever between population groups, but our brains have so much trouble getting to the right level of nuance that it's probably better to avoid such things entirely.
 
So you're asking us if it would be ok to use racial stereotypes in a fantasy world where not would stereotypes be true, they'd be quantifiable? I can't wrap my head around this.

I'm not asking for an exact number to 3 decimal places or something :(

I'm not expecting anyone to exactly count and write down every case they come across and report back.

You can say:very low, low, high, very high, etc. as well.
 
Don't have one. I'm bombarded by, and immersed in white culture to the point that I'd need it to be narrowed down. Same with the black stereotype, to a slightly smaller degree.

Look. I hate to put you on the spot, but I'm finding it real hard to believe that you can't come up with 1(presumably negative) stereotype for white people.
I'm not asking for an exact number to 3 decimal places or something :(

I'm not expecting anyone to exactly count and write down every case they come across and report back.

You can say:very low, low, high, very high, etc. as well.

Are you white by chance? Live in NA/Europe?
 
I like how when someone tries to list white people's stereotypes (because white people have it hard too guys!)

Like...

White people like mayo - Not really the same thing as saying black people are criminals.
 
Why are stereotypes problematic? Because the numbers are enormously skewed on the way to your brain from real life. Let's say that your "black people don't tip" example is actually true. What would that mean? Maybe 25% of black restaurant-goers are bad tippers, while 20% of restaurant-goers in general are bad tippers. Trouble is, your brain won't see it that way. Your brain, once the slight difference has been brought to its notice, will engage in confirmation bias and will notice cases where black people don't tip more than cases where black people do tip, or cases where other restaurant-goers don't tip. In other words, your brain will take a slight difference and elevate it to a rule of thumb. From "black people are slightly disproportionately bad tippers" to "black people are bad tippers."
That's not problematic in and of itself. That's how people generally work on ALL levels. People aren't usually discouraged from forming general opinions based on their experiences- they are only discouraged when said opinions happen to contradict a dogma that often has no factual or solid basis itself.

With that said, it's not bad to restrain yourself from overgeneralizing based on experience and learning to tell the difference between generalizing and overgeneralizing. But it shouldn't be based on an orthodoxy that you have swallowed whole.
 
educators and employers should expect less of "x" demographic and more of "y" demographic, 'cause stereotypes tend to be true

/canofworms

I know you're joking and all. But one thing that's always bothered me is the easier access to education in the states for minorities. It's not necessarily wrong, trying to raise the suffering parts of your society is a great thing. But at what point does it end? Aren't Latino's soon to surpass white people in America? So will white people/Should white people who are poor and suffering(There are lots of them too), not have the same opportunity?
 
Some folks around me think it's weird how much Americans seem to care about straight teeth and the like.

Lots of 'bad teeth' here in Japan.

Our vanity knows no bounds.

Also, here's my white stereotypes: White people are boring as hell. They lack any semblance of culture (bridezillas does not count). They would rather drive two blocks in their hummer to Starbucks instead of walk, and they're the virus that enables vast swathes of urban sprawl through some misplaced determination to acquire unnecessary capital, namely large houses and large cars. /rant

are all white people like this? certainly not. However I almost wouldn't fault a non-white person who has limited exposure to white people for believing that we're all like this, given how prevalent it is in some places. Though I would appreciate the benefit of the doubt, I suppose.
 
I can't speculate on all Indian people, just the customers of my store. But in doing so, I have stereotyped them. Working there 6 years in a position of authority, I believe I can make a comment on this subject.

Now I'm not judging their behavior. I love a paying customer as much as the next retail manager. However, I have always found cultural differences to be an interesting topic.

Perhaps the Indian customers I am referencing are equally fascinated by the reason this white guy (me) doesn't want to make a better deal for them at the register.

It's universal to want to save money, and I suppose some groups of people are more up front about it.

Again, just my experience. No harm meant.
To be clear, I thought you were starting from a general stereotype and working down, instead of building a client profile based on store attendance over a long period, which is somewhat different. I completely object the first, but I can see the purpose of the second in most cases.

But I did read it as 'I see it every day, so the general case is true', so sorry.
 
Then you probably shouldn't be using the word "stereotypes." That term doesn't carry the connotation "correct 90% of the time."

Slight reframe: is it acceptable to assume something about members of a population, when that thing is true of 90% of the members of that population?

Let's invent an example and say that 90% of Lusitanians wear socks to bed. If you meet a Lusitanian, is it all right to ask them what type of socks they usually wear when they go to bed?

Alternately, a negative example. If the proportion of innocent people in jail is a randomly distributed 10%, and you meet someone who just got out of jail, is it reasonable to assume they committed a crime?

I would say yes in both examples, though depending on why you wanted the information, it would probably be wise to wait for further evidence. But knowing nothing else, you could start with a 90% probability and go from there.

Why are stereotypes problematic? Because the numbers are enormously skewed on the way to your brain from real life. Let's say that your "black people don't tip" example is actually true. What would that mean? Maybe 25% of black restaurant-goers are bad tippers, while 20% of restaurant-goers in general are bad tippers. Trouble is, your brain won't see it that way. Your brain, once the slight difference has been brought to its notice, will engage in confirmation bias and will notice cases where black people don't tip more than cases where black people do tip, or cases where other restaurant-goers don't tip. In other words, your brain will take a slight difference and elevate it to a rule of thumb. From "black people are slightly disproportionately bad tippers" to "black people are bad tippers."

Plus, your brain will go directly to conclusions, will not pass go, will not wait for further evidence.

This is why we are generally discouraged from stereotyping. It's true that stereotypes might have a seed of truth, and it would be false to claim that all stereotypes are wrong, or that there are no differences whatsoever between population groups, but our brains have so much trouble getting to the right level of nuance that it's probably better to avoid such things entirely.

Good post.

I did account for the "bad tipper" definition in the OP.

Your example gives a 5% difference b/w regular tippers and black tippers. Now, anyone reasonable wouldn't really care.

But what if 50% of black tippers are bad tippers (re: OP). That's a whopping 30% difference b/w them and the average tipper.

Is it still wrong to conclude anything?
 
That's not problematic in and of itself. That's how people generally work on ALL levels.
Sure. Cells that fire together wire together, etc.

People aren't generally discouraged from forming general opinions based on their experiences- they are only discouraged when said opinions happen to contradict a dogma that often has no factual or solid basis itself.
Heh. I'd say it's more that they're discouraged because they've in the past proven harmful to entire populations of people without yielding a commensurate gain in useful information to those who use them, but ymmv.
 
Look. I hate to put you on the spot, but I'm finding it real hard to believe that you can't come up with 1(presumably negative) stereotype for white people.


Are you white by chance? Live in NA/Europe?

Dunno how that's relevant, but no and no.
 
Sure. Cells that fire together wire together, etc.


Heh. I'd say it's more that they're discouraged because they've in the past proven harmful to entire populations of people without yielding a commensurate gain in useful information to those who use them, but ymmv.

That's not how it works. Statements are not evaluated on an individual basis for harm. Rather, a dogma has built up of what is and isn't true, which is often entirely separate from what IS true (if that is even known, which it very well may not be).
 
Good post.

I did account for the "bad tipper" definition in the OP.

Your example gives a 5% difference b/w regular tippers and black tippers. Now, anyone reasonable wouldn't really care.

But what if 50% of black tippers are bad tippers (re: OP). That's a whopping 30% difference b/w them and the average tipper.

Is it still wrong to conclude anything?

I'm sorry, but; holy fuck dude. JUST SAY WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY! Good lord. Nobody is going to ban you since we're all discussing the same thing. It's a stereotype, so it's "fine" in this context.

Dunno how that's relevant, but no and no.
It's relevant because I was wondering what lens you were looking through.
 
A general problem is the conflation of what is orthodox and acceptable to say with what is believed, from personal experience, to be true or false. Something you have found from personal experience does not become false because it is not orthodox. That's not a valid standard of evaluation.
 
people say "black people are good at basketball" but in reality a majority of good basketball players are black, but not all black people are good basketball players.

Whoa.

I think this sums up everything quite well.

This is truth, but Ive never heard anyone say it and never thought of it that way.

Seems really obvious now.
 
I don't think it's unfair to acknowledge trends.

Assuming stereotypes are true before you get to know someone and treating people differently because of them, though? That's just being a dick.


I used to work at a Subway. I don't think it was unfair to notice that a certain group tended to leave bigger messes. They frequently made no attempt to throw anything away, and instead left their trays and wrappers and everything at their table for me to clean off. It was hard not to notice this trend, especially considering they were the only group who ever did that instead of tossing it on the way out.

But I still treated them with the same respect I gave everyone when they walked in, instead of assuming they were gonna leave a mess. There were plenty of people from that group who came in and did not leave a mess. And even if there weren't, there was no rule stating that there never would be.


Stereotypes are wrong, but acting like every culture and race and religion and whatever is the same and that noticing differences between them is automatically racism is a bit naive.
 
The one stereotype I learned is true: Japanese kids will play Mortal Kombat II on the Genesis with their feet and still beat the crap out of you :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom