I think I speak for most of us when I say that we're getting a bit burnt out on the never-ending discussion about how our work at Project Angel Heart makes us feel regarding illness, if we've changed our minds on how we view disease, etc. etc. etc. Please, no one take that too personally because all of the discussions we've had have been beneficiary in some way, but I just think it's time for something new. so here's my attempt...
we've had many commments on how negative stigmas are and how they should be gotten rid of, but have any of us stopped to consider what our society would be like without such stigmas and stereotypes? i hate stereotypes as much as the next person, but what would happen if we simply eradicated them completely? would we truly benefit? in fact, is it even within the bounds of human consciousness to exist without any sense of stereotypes?
human beings are pack animals - we are not meant to live as hermits. and so much of our time is spent trying to fit into a certain group or image - how would we really function without these social stereotypes and images?
this, at least for me, raises a fascinating conundrum and a double standard of sorts - we are constantly striving to be individuals, to define ourselves as different from everyone else on the planet, and yet we are trying to fit certain stereotypes of the individual. is this is any way escapable? is it negative or positive?
i realize that i really didn't talk about illness at all during this post, and that i basically just asked a ton of (relatively) rhetorical questions, but i would really like to hear what such questions make each of you think about. and hopefully, it will be a welcome break from commenting constantly on our reactions to AIDS :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
When we hear the word stereotype, our first reaction is a sort of cringing. Our modern day culture teaches us that all stereotypes are bad. Stereotypes are what uphold the inequality between whites and blacks, men and women, and whatever other oppositions you can think of.
Personally, I don't think the human mind can function without these stereotypes. Has anyone ever heard of the binary box theory? It deals with stereotypes in this way, saying that in our mind we create these boxes in which every word in our vocabulary is categorized as being either top box our lower box. In each box there is two words, with the one on the top generally taking the positive connotation in the opposition, and the bottom taking the negative one.
It is in these boxes that we get our stereotypes. We end up defining what something is but what it is not. In crude terms, you know something is light when you know that it is not dark, or vice versa. Therefore, if we get rid of stereotypes, which are generally the negative connotations we apply to the opposites of what we consider good, we could very well be throwing out all of the good along with it.
In that case, I don't think its worth it.
I believe that we--both as a class and, to a lesser extent, as human beings--have a tendency to generalize too much. I think that to say something like "stereotypes are bad" is as flawed as to say something like "cancer kills." True, this may be the case in certain situations, but it is not universally true (as we make it out to be).
Thus, I believe that the best way to address this issue is to ask what stereotypes are useful and necessary in our day-to-day lives, and what stereotypes are harmful. The stereotype of the "withered" cancer patient, for example, is a harmful stereotype, a byproduct of our societal fear. Yet, humans need stereotypes in order to function in a social setting. Stereotypes help us determine how to address, respond to, and act around individuals based on no prior experience around them. Humans cannot function without them.
I think it to be a tad ironic, then, to stereotype stereotypes themselves as being a universally "bad" thing. It is, of course, imperative that we remain sensitive to the harm certain stereotypes can cause. In the long run, however, I believe the issue lies not with stereotypes in general, but with the case-specific content of the stereotypes.
I would like to offer a contrary/complementary (maybe both) view on Frazer's comment about generalizations. While I do agree that we tend to generalize to much, I would argue that this tendency is a natural human characteristic. We cannot process all of the possible idiosyncrasies of a particular group, disease, or demographic every time we think of them. Generalization is the mechanism by which we can still associate these things with other generalized things (apologies for being redundant). If we did not generalize as much as we do, I doubt that we could ever communicate in a universal or cultural context. That is, without generalization, we would not be able to convey ideas or concepts. For example (a poor one, but an example), when someone says "the bird was orange" we might all think of our individual interpretations of orange, or everything that we have ever seen that is orange and think of what those things meant to us and what other things could possibly be orange and what they might be like or what they might mean, and how they are all the same but different, but instead we generalize and think of just the color. Thus, in my opinion, without generalization, we would not be able to convey ideas or concepts without a great deal of sidetracking or misunderstanding.
Stereotypes develop naturally within the human mind. The sight of a particular type of people doing something leaves an impressionable mark in the viewer's mind. Now this is not necessarily bad as these generalizations and stereotypes do not always pertain to people of different ethnicities. For example an event such as seeing a pit bull act someone, may create the stereotype in someone's mind that all pit bulls are aggressive dogs. This stereotype may actually save your life if you were considering to give a kiss to a fuming pit bull. What is interesting about this debate of whether stereotypes are beneficial/detrimental or good/bad is especially pertinent to racial profiling. Should racial profiling be legal? An 80 year-old grandmother is not going to be a suicide bomber, but a 25 year-old educated Islamic fundamentalist may be. So logically it would be sensible to target those that appear more dangerous according to our preconceived stereotypes. However, at the same time that is an infringement upon the natural rights of the majority of citizens, who are clearly not terrorists. Thus it can be said that while stereotypes do have a functioning role in society and rightfully so, they also need to be constricted to that they do not impede on the rights of others.
thanks cortney, i really appreciate the change of pace with this post. i imagine that it was difficult for you to contain your sarcasm, but i really think that the ideas you posed are a valuable topic of discussion. stereotypes can be very harmful to the individual, they can keep people from reaching their potential or receiving the proper amount of attention from others. regardless of how much harm they can cause, stereotypes ca never be removed from the human mind. we start building stereotypes as a mechanism of identifying people in infancy and never quit. thus, in order to reduce the harm that stereotypes cause, i think that we should fully acknowledge them, even make light of them. if we do so, it will be easier to remove the reputation a group has from the individuals in the group. does that make sense? its not appropriate to fully acknowledge them in this format but stereotypes may be robbed of their potency if we concede their existence and occasional relevance in
return for realizing they are often incorrect. maybe....
I think the idea of a world free of pre-conceived notions is certainly an intriguing one. When I first perused Cortney’s prompt and the comments thus far, I decided that perhaps looking at a definition of “stereotype” and “stigma” might be a good starting place…
stereotype: a conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception or image
stigma: a mark or token of infamy, disgrace, or reproach; a mark or characteristic indicative of a history of disease or abnormality
After considering these definitions for a moment, it occurred to me that perhaps it is unfair to inextricably link “stereotype” and “stigma” because the two concepts differ in important ways. Many have argued that a world free to stereotypes and stigmas would be implausible, but what of a world void of just stigmas? This, I believe, could have possibilities.
I found it really interesting to note that the literal definition of stigma actually alluded to the idea of disease and even went as far as equating it with some type of abnormality; as we have discussed time and time again, the connection between illness and abnormality is the problematic metaphor (an understatement). Moreover, if we could eliminate stigma in every form—illness and beyond—I think we might be able to eradicate the negative implications that all of society associates with the term “stereotype” while reconciling ourselves to the fact that we cannot live without stereotypes. Just a thought…
When I hear the word stereotype, I don’t cringe. I think of comedians. I have been taught throughout all of my schooling, at home and in society that stereotypes are wrong and anyone who actively encourages them is a bigot. For these reasons, I find them hilarious. Stereotypes generalize, they assume and they encourage people to ignore all the diversity in an individual – they are terrible. I can’t think of many worse aspects of humanity. Understanding this, I also can’t help but laugh at how absurd they are. Accepting that people, being group conscious, will never escape the concept of stereotypes – good and bad – why not step off our moral pedestals and laugh a little?
Reading the various posts for this blog, I gain the overwhelming impression that stereotypes sicken most everyone and for good reason. Everyone also seems to agree, however, that they are inescapable. I think understanding stereotypes and their negative connotations is necessary, but I don’t see why we need to cast them out of society, abolish them or make them taboo. Can any of you honestly say that you have watched comedy central and not laughed at a comedian’s skit, which almost always contains an abundance of stereotype humor?
I suppose the point I am slowly drifting towards is this: stereotypes are detrimental when they are used to mask a person’s individuality; however, stereotypes can also be explored in a far less serious and increasingly light-hearted manner. In such environments, I don’t see stereotypes being such a bane on our immaculate moral standards.
Courtney, thank you so much for the topic change.
Stereotypes are time savers.
As bigoted as this statement may sound, it is true. We as humans make generalizations to categorize people into groups which we already understand. And while this practice is detrimental in the fact that it takes away the individuality of a person, it is also convenient. If a person appears by their looks or actions to fit into a certain group, then the individual who is judging can decide whether or not it is worthwhile to pursue a relationship further.
The danger comes with the way in which stereotypes are created in the mind of each person. The bigger the group included in a stereotype, the more likely it is to be inaccurate. Therefore, categorizing people by race or gender or other such vast entity classes rarely, if ever, points at any sort of truth. Smaller classifications are generally more correct. However, the other important part of using stereotypes to one’s benefit is to always remember that they are simply stereotypes. Such generalizations are extremely flexible and are in some ways meant to be broken. Because we are all unique individuals, no one of us fits clearly into anyone else’s predefined group.
As long as we keep these realizations in mind, then stereotypes can be helpful to comprehending our world and the people around us.
Alyssa made an interesting point that I would like to build off of. First, I am glad that she made the differences between the words ‘stigma’ and ‘stereotype’.
In general, people think that these words are easily interchangeable. Even in our class, including myself, have we used these words in place of the other. Our class has come to some consensus that stereotypes are good in certain situations.
However, do we even understand what those situations are? Can we truly say that stereotypes are good if we ourselves do not even understand the condition under which to use them?
Sure, stereotypes protect us from people…most of the time. We pursue certain courses in life because stereotypes turn us away from others. However, does the supposedly “positive” side to stereotypes really outweigh the “negative”? Imagine how much people have missed out on, because of stereotypes. There have been dozens of pathways that have been avoided for the sake of a “good stereotype”. We say that our world wouldn’t function without stereotypes. That cannot be proven. We cannot pass judgment on something that we do not know, using facts that we obviously do not understand. The only way of testing this theory, is to put it into action.
And although I seem like I am against stereotypes, I am actually with the rest of the class. I believe that stereotypes are indeed needed. But while reading through everyone’s responses, it made me think of other ways to approach the subject, than what had already been written. I would like to add that I truly enjoy reading everyone else’s responses.
Here is Sarai Glass's comment to this post:
Society would be dramatically different without stereotypes. I feel like society exists because of stereotypes and images. If it weren’t for these stigmas, what would differentiate an individual apart from the next? Society thrives on social stereotypes. I can’t say that this really would benefit society in that society would not exist. It is impossible to exist without any sense of stereotypes. Good or bad, they exist because humans share lifestyles, characteristics, and preferences amongst each other. Fitting into groups and images is a main priority of all humans. Without images to fit, we would feel alone, and companionship would be difficult. Seeing similarities, as well as differences, for better or for worse, is what makes communication and interaction among humans possible. It is possible to be an individual in a stereotypical setting, and that is what is so appealing about stereotypes. Stereotypes are a means of identity and definition. This can have positive or nega tive impacts. Instead of thinking about the abolishment of stereotypes, we should concentrate on the creation of positive stereotypes.
As far as stigmas and stereotypes go, I'm not sure exactly how to view them. I understand where Courtney is coming from with everyone trying to fit into a group, but couldn't we all fit into the group of people? Do we really have to segregate ourselves based on certain qualities? I think the basic idea, at least in my mind, is that we should be trying to get rid of judgments or pre judgments about people in our society. I think what we need to focus on rather then putting people into boxes is letting them put themselves into the boxes that they want to be associated with. It isn't our place to judge them. We should be making more of an effort to get to know someone for their personality and who they truly are and not who we sometimes define them as through their disease, pastimes, or physical features.
I would therefore agree with Jon and Frazer that stereotypes are necessary and even in some cases necessary in our lives. However, I would also argue that we need to refrain from judging others without knowing their personality. There is a difference between stereotyping a group of people and using that information to be cautious and judging someone without knowing them and refusing to associate with them or ostracizing them.
Thank you for not talking about disease. I was about ready to shoot myself. I agree that it is puzzling how stereotyping is both resented and necessary in our society. I don’t know how functioning the populace would be if everyone was completely and totally unique from everyone else; if there was no way to categorize people. What I find most absurd is the fact that some feel they have eliminated all stereotypical action from their repertoire. Every single day we do hundreds of tiny, unconscious things in reaction to judgments that have been ingrained inside our very being. It’s a very sweet thought, a world without stereotypes, it’s just not realistic. What is it about this categorization that we fear?
It seems like I agree with most of us when I say that stereotypes aren’t the most flattering element of society. However, I think that they are indeed necessary for our survival. This is clear to me because stereotypes aren’t just a phenomenon utilized in America, but in societies worldwide. Every culture, from the most advanced to least, uses stereotypes to classify people within their society. It is a technique for survival. The most basic psychological knowledge tells us that we must organize, classify, and divide ideas and experiences. How could we not apply this most basic of tendencies to humans as well? How can we use our fantastically advanced brains to arrange matter into all kinds of categories and exclude humans from this judgment?
If it weren’t in part for stereotypes I wouldn’t be an honors student at DU. If I didn’t care what occupation and income bracket I ended up in, I would have dropped out of school long ago to work at a fast food restaurant. The fact of the matter is that I do care, because honestly I do stereotype people who work undesirable jobs. I would classify them as lower than someone with a Bachelor’s or Master’s degree. I am grateful for stereotypes. If they didn’t exist I wouldn’t be compelled to make myself the best that I can possibly be.
Good call, Courtney. This is a great new direction for discussion!
Personally, I think stereotypes are unavoidable. It comes naturally to us as human beings to connect ideas and find patterns in the world around us. We look for rules that we can count on to be true at least most of the time in specific situations, and develop catalogues of attributes that are common in certain "types" of people. These tendencies in thinking certainly can yield negative results - prejudice, racism, and general divisions between groups of people. The idea of trying to completely eradicate the tendency towards stereotyping strikes me as far more alarming, however.
If it were possible, I think that rather than promoting greater unity it could result in people losing the ability to identify with any group of people. If personal identity had no connection to other people or groups of people, this in turn could result in some very narcissistic human beings. I doubt that it is possible to eradicate stereotyping, however, so this scenario is highly unlikely. It is far more probable that such an attempt would simply produce new patterns of thinking, and new (though perhaps more positive) stereotypes would emerge.
I agree with Sarah P. that humans have an natural inclination to join together; most crave a sense of belonging. Thinking back to the college selection process, how many times did you hear, "find a place where you can belong" "where you fit" "where you could see yourself succeeding"?
Many college students speak of a feeling they had when they walked on campus. I'm guessing that this feeling wasn't magical. Think of DU's campus. There are signs hanging from each lamp post of students engaging in learning or quoting their favorite aspect of our university and the models in the pictures come from many different racial backgrounds. Maybe seeing someone that looks like you on a lamp post aids in that feeling of belonging. Statistically, however, DU is predominately Caucasian; why does the admissions department work so hard to counteract these statistics? The answer, to break down stereotypes - that DU is a "white" school or even more broadly, that other races don't go to college.
My roommate and I were photographed for the new batch of promotional materials with a group of some other students last quarter. For half of the shots, I was walking arm in arm with an Asian American boy whom I had never met before. Clearly, DU is trying to send out that message that we break down stereotypes here. A white girl and an Asian boy can find love at DU...what stereotype will you knock down with your education?
Whether you agree with this kind of diversity promotion or not, we can see that there is a push utilize stereotypes at our own university. I'm not sure now if DU is trying to break down stereotypes (with the picture of me and my Asian boyfriend) or promote them to create a feeling of belonging for more students. Either way, stereotypes are vital to the way our society works today.
Post a Comment